The financial system, of any nature, ends up serving the purposes of hierarchical power, but the financial system is not the CAUSE of that power, nor of that wealth. It is just one of the means.
Geez, you really do have time. ^ This is wrong in so many levels. Long story short. USA has how much gold? Like $500 - $600 billion, but the M2 money in circulation are like $12 - $13 trillion. These "money" includes (very often) imaginary assets. You can't say: - Give me $1 trillion. I have 25 million BTC in assets. - Bite me! There are not more than 21 million. Period. This of course can change in the future. But that is why I am not ruling everything out, it would be stupid. The number of outcomes is big. |
|
|
|
Can you help me with legal documents?
Write me PM and I can help with what I can. But btw, there is a high chance for me to relocate in the UK in the next 2-3 weeks.  |
|
|
|
Maybe, a nice farm on the outskirts of Varna?  Nah. I would recommend you my hometown Razlog (Разлог). You can google it.   |
|
|
|
Time to be a Hitar Petar and choose anything other than Ethereum Hahaha! Хитър Петър! Time to ride the donkey and be careless:  |
|
|
|
There is a difference between holding $300k in a bank account and owning a house worth $300k. First ain't worth shit and second is a property. But that doesn't change the fact that you can't buy that house with your bank account. Simplicity is what matters, lets try not to dig that deeply. The average Joe (I will always use that as example, because it is what cryptos needs in order to get better adoption) doesn't know how a bank is operating. All he cares is to deposit/withdraw/use the money. Cryptocurrencies must stick to that! Why the hell I need to listen/watch countless of hours of explanations on how Bitcoin works? Or Litecoin for that matter? There are "geeks" who are taking care off. I am Joe and I don't care! Currently our discussion is pointless, because I'm not trying to convince you that cryptocurrencies are money. Same applies for fungibility. We both have our own opinions, but here's the thing... our opinion doesn't really matter. That's it... I now need to open (and try to repear) a smartphone and a laptop. Then I must do the dishes. Cheers, EDIT: Couldn't help it... You don't go to a hillbilly (Joe) to explain 2 hours what is Litecoin. You go to a hillbilly with: - Hey, do you want to buy some beers and watch Nascar with 10% discount? You get 1 cow for free. Then later on, Adam (Joe's friend) asked him what he did: - I had few beers and watched NASCAR with 10% discount using Litecoin. - What is Litecoin? - Uhm.... I don't know. After that it is the LTC's devs responsibility to keep the guy's money safe. And that's the simple truth. Majority of the people don't know that the money are just numbers in someone's computer. US M2 money are like a $12 trillion... if not more. It is how countries with less than 600k population has a $3.6 trillion external debt (Luxembourg). That's because over a 150 different banks are operating there. Of course, at the end, Carl in Somalia works for $0.10/hour instead for $1, but that's okay if the top 1% (actually, a lot less) is fine by that. You can't do that with crypto. Not if supply is strictly fixed. |
|
|
|
Nope. It means that there is no distinction between the different units of a single monetary asset. That THIS dollar bill, or THAT dollar bill, are equivalent.
Forget the wikipedia. Fungibility actually means that there is no distinction between $10 bill and $10 worth of Litecoin. This is the true (and of course, my humble opinion) meaning. I can't agree with you about the "zero-sum" game claim, and I've noticed you used it number of times. It does not generally determine what cryptocurrencies are. Otherwise, we should just rule Forex (or any kind of) trading out and go back to the stone ages. I agree that the cryptoworld is a "field" where there are groups of people (pumpers) reaping off the average Joe and a lot of scammers and I really hate that. These people are saying "Hey, the average Joe is stupid and he is the one to blame if he loses his $5" and they might be right, but personally if I had the chance, I would skull f*ck everyone doing such things. We must be better than this and if someone is naive enough that doesn't mean that you should rip him off. These people have no dignity! EDIT: This is because of one simple reason: The average Joe does not accept Bitcoin as money.
We don't care about the average Joe. We care about the people wanting to use a free money, to do the trades that they want to do. Lee already said it - gimmicks are not that important. Adoption is.
Adoption only matters if it serves a purpose. Otherwise it is just another thing to rip off people in a zero sum game. Oh, wow... Of course we must care about the average Joe. This is why cryptocurrencies must be explained using simplicity. Why so many people fails to understand that? Do you personally care that there are people in Bangladesh which are making a living by fishing? You probably don't even know a single guy from that country yet its population is 170 f*cking million. That is why there are so many discussions about fungibility. So cryptocurrencies to meet different needs. Let's forget for a moment that currently gimmicks in cryptocurrencies are mainly because some people are looking for a way to get rich quick. But we are not 2014 anymore. This will not matter in few years (if cryptocurrencies survive... or at least their idea). |
|
|
|
So far Altcoins are not being adopted.
Bitcoin almost neither. A little bit, such as for VPN, or VPS. That's what I'm using it for. But it is not much. Sorry for creating a second post, but I missed that and I think it's fair not to edit my previous comment. This is because of one simple reason: The average Joe does not accept Bitcoin as money. I've said it number of times that I stopped talking with my real friends about cryptocurrencies, but they slowly starts to realize that they are indeed money. Like one of them who is a simple-minded driver (it could be classified as an american hillbilly). He was with me in couple of occasions when I exchanged bitcoins for BGN (the Bulgarian currency) and then asked him: - Do you think that Bitcoin is money now? He is still not convinced. Lee already said it - gimmicks are not that important. Adoption is. This is my "philosophy" too, no matter if SomeNewCoin make a 0.1 ms transaction to Neptune, without aliens to track it. EDIT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeJpQQt_b8c - so much with the VISA. |
|
|
|
Eh, fungibility doesn't mean that your coin is universally accepted.
It is exactly (and mainly) that. But cryptocurrencies (as of now) will be always compared with fiat money (i.e. when John is accepting LTC for his services, he will always compute it in USD/EURO/whatever). That if I do a bank transfer of Euros to your account, you do not care exactly "what Euros" (that doesn't even make sense for bank Euros) or "who owned which Euro before me".
Transfer what kind of money? M2 money? With bitcoin (and litecoin, and ethereum, and ...) that IS the difficulty: you DO care whether this coin was once on Silk Road, or owned by the DAO hacker, or ...
Well, yes... this surely could raise some questions if a crime is committed and part of these money are traced to you. Is that what all this mess is about ? Concerning security and speed, VISA is way, way better. So in the end, people will adopt currencies because of a logo ?
Of course not... and somehow - yes. You must always try to foresee how the masses would react to your product. So far Litecoin could depend solely on Charlie Lee's decisions (if he decide to do something, which he thinks is good for Litecoin (but I'm not saying he'll do that)). P.S. Please stop with your VISA examples. The future is ahead of us and currently cryptocurrencies needs to increase their user base. If that happens x5 by the end of 2017 it would be a huge success. That would (presumably) give them market cap of $60B, which is still 3-4 times less than the VISA alone. EDIT: Ah, and let's focus on the subject of the thread my friend. |
|
|
|
But transparent block chains are WAY WAY WAY less private than fiat.
^ This! This is the main argument, which cryptocurrencies have! But who wants that ? Nobody wants transparency for himself. At best, you would like to have transparency for TPTB, but you will never get it. So the only thing that remains, is that TPTB will remain just as opaque, but that YOU, simple citizen, will be entirely delivered to total transparency. Who the hell would want such a thing, apart from TPTB ? I think that we should simplify things and don't think too deeply. Let's just focus on fungibility. We have, how much? Probably over 150 different fiat currencies, but there are a lot of places where you will not be able to use your $ (or whatever). You are often limited. Serbia for example is not in the EU yet they are accepting EURO in most of their shops and services. Bulgaria is in the EU, but shops and services are generally not accepting euro as a payment. You need to exchange them for BGN. There are lot of different things that may attract people to use some cryptocurrencies. Some cares about its security, others for its speed and there are even people who only cares about the logo. To them is important how you look, no matter if you are the greatest product/mind in the world. |
|
|
|
But transparent block chains are WAY WAY WAY less private than fiat.
^ This! This is the main argument, which cryptocurrencies have! I already said that If confidential transaction is something optional, then it's ok - no worries. If the states start claiming that is a way for doing crimes, then we can all blame companies which produces weapons for all the killings caused by their "products". It's like "You are producing something, which can kill people.". EDIT: i.e. They don't take responsibility for what happens next. But then again, states are always twisting things so... |
|
|
|
Yes but using litecoin for crimes will happen anyway, just look at bitcoin. The advantage of having confidential transactions in making each coin fungible and the same. Unlike bitcoin now some people fear that the coins that went thru the darknet market will have less value than the coins that did not.
For me personally I think it is overrated but those people that said that fungibility is important for the future of the coin might be right.
What is needed is cryptocurrencies to be (widely) accepted as money. A lot of people care about their privacy, but they have it (at least they think they do) while using fiat money, right? Cryptocurrencies should focus on being "better money", not a "better way to hide ourselves". You are looking at the situation from the point of view of the authorities. Better money is only better if it gives ordinary people the freedom and the control of their own money without any individual or institution snooping around and trying to stop it. Also I think your fear is caused by thinking that your favorite coin might lose "value" in $ because the said authorities might come after the users of the coin. Let go of that thought. No. I am trying to foresee how authorities would/may react. How about companies which are transferring money by using cash trucks? "G4S" alone has over 600,000 employees. The blockchain tech could literally kill them and anonymity won't help here. This alone makes cryptocurrencies a better money and its more than enough for them to become widely used. Cryptocurrencies should not necessary replace fiat money. I'm not trying to insult anyone, but I think that no one with their right mind can think that they actually can replace the mighty $ (or euro, GBP - you name it). Some day it may happen, but I think we are not going to be alive and see it. Don't get me wrong, I have no fear. Why do you think I'm using my identity and everything? It can only take you 30 seconds to know who I am. That's because I simply don't care. When you are discussing something, which does not depends on you, then you must always add the masses in the equation. Digital currencies needs to improve their security and scalability issues, nothing more. After that it all depends on how you are market them. Most of the fiat bills are just papers, which matters to some of us. You are just giving a paper in the store and they are giving you good. Who said that this particular bill worth something? A $100 bill worth the paper, ink and the work involved in its creation. Go and give that bill to some Zulu hunter, he won't give you even a gazelle's hoof for it. That's pretty much it. Linux is far superior than Windows OS, but go and compare Linus Torvalds and Gates's net worth. |
|
|
|
mar my words.
"litecoin will go to the moon in the near future."
the whales have been accumulating and if anybody was left behind or was busy in other places, they have came back to litecoin again. and especially with the current news about the confidential transactions which is the new popular interest, there will be a lot of attention to litecoin and soon there will be a big rise because of all this.
Yeah, right. And what if the scenario with the authorities targeting anon coins become a reality? All of these altcoins are going to rush in hard forks or just die. Guess what happens with the rest who didn't took that way? |
|
|
|
Yes but using litecoin for crimes will happen anyway, just look at bitcoin. The advantage of having confidential transactions in making each coin fungible and the same. Unlike bitcoin now some people fear that the coins that went thru the darknet market will have less value than the coins that did not.
For me personally I think it is overrated but those people that said that fungibility is important for the future of the coin might be right.
What is needed is cryptocurrencies to be (widely) accepted as money. A lot of people care about their privacy, but they have it (at least they think they do) while using fiat money, right? Cryptocurrencies should focus on being "better money", not a "better way to hide ourselves". |
|
|
|
Honestly i haven't checked it myself every and each of these projects but from what i've checked:
1. Digix offers something the world needs, easy way to buy gold.
2. Akasha, decentralized social media, we've all seen that censoring is really bad, especially in countries with 3rd world regime and mentality, like russia, china, every other dictatorship, etc......
When did China and Russia become 3rd world regimes? Maybe you should add America to the list for its police state? They love to execute there citizens in the street and post it all up on social media over there in the US... not forgetting that it is also a corrupt crony capitalist dictatorship. Are you one of these deluded exceptionalists that think they are better than others? I am not trying to defending him, but I guess what he meant is the level of censorship in those countries And what is the level of censorship in the USA? Pretty much the same (if not higher), but in a hypocrite way. Same goes for your country, mine... the entire world is censored. People who are using the "3rd world countries" wording are often thinking that people which lives in these countries are considered less humans. This is their hypocrite way to say "Hey, I'm free to do whatever I want, unlike these people". Yeah, right... |
|
|
|
@spartak_t. I am curious what you think. For fungibility's sake is it not better for LTC to have confidential transactions? Wouldn't that make each coin have more value?
It is my name so you can call me Spartak (Spartacus). What I think could not be fully explained with my poor English wording. Early on I've said that if the anonymity/confidential feature is optional, then it's fine, but this is again two-edged sword. Let's say that I represent a powerful state, which is fighting cryptocurrencies and my opinion matters. I can just say: - Litecoin gives you the chance to do crimes. Darknet markets are named like that for a reason. No matter if you sell flowers or AK47's. |
|
|
|
Not even close. I don't think that's the idea and imho, it would be a huge mistake. I honestly believe that the anon coins would be targeted by the authorities at some point.
This sounds like "I think that strong crypto will be targeted by the authorities at a certain point, so let us all use backdoored crypto". Or "I think that free, secure operating systems are going to be targeted by authorities at a certain point, so let us all use win10 or OsX". Or ... You can list many things. If you are afraid of using your freedom, because those wanting you to be their slave will be after you, then you've already lost your freedom. If you do not stand behind your freedom, one will not give it to you. So, yes of course, anon coins will be targeted. So what ? Non-anon coins will be institutionalized, and lose their purpose. This will never change, no matter what I think or feel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEhSk71gUCQWhat do you mean by "targeted by the authorities"? Do you think anon makes Litecoin less valuable because of this?
Your words: I said it would be hard for Coinbase to justify adding a coin that's sole purpose is to be a currency for DNM. So for example, now that a few DNMs are adding Monero to elude government tracking, it would raise a lot of regulator's eyebrows if Coinbase added Monero to its platform.
I'm not saying that adding certain anonymity would make it less valuable. That has nothing to do with it. I'm just saying that "some people" would raise their eyebrows. I'm not living in a movie full of conspiracy theories, but in reality they can just label Litecoin as a threat of the national security of Zimbabwe and screw it all over. They are not even obliged to explain why. I personally think that anonymity would be a main weapon of the states which are fighting crypto. P.S. I have no problems to go outside my building now and scream "power to the people", and then fight with whoever makes me remarks. |
|
|
|
It is going to be an uphill battle if LTC is trying to implement and match the privacy features that of monero.
Somehow I don't think that is the goal, based on recent statements, but it remains to be seen what is true.
Not even close. I don't think that's the idea and imho, it would be a huge mistake. I honestly believe that the anon coins would be targeted by the authorities at some point. P.S. Don't take this like I am a XMR hater. |
|
|
|
On a side note, spartak_t are you the one behind @failcommunity handle?
Yes. It's not a personal account (though I have one, but I'm not using it), but as for now I am the only one who controls it. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
