Ripple would not kill Bitcoin, only enhance it.
It would dampen the prospected BTC value in the future though. |
|
|
|
Why would one cryptocurrency (e.x. Bitcoin) be more valuable than another?
They would also have to be (merge-) mined in order to be secure and valuable. |
|
|
|
or did someone think we are all junkies buying on silkroad?
what's the difference  |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is unlikely to achieve a stable value in the foreseeable future, but that doesn't matter. Bitcoin is not destined to be used directly in ordinary commerce. Think about how HTTP is built on top of TCP/IP. In the same way, we will build new, stable currencies on top of bitcoin. They will be pegged to dollars, gold, oil, and anything else your heart desires.
I wrote a paper about this future, and if you come to the bitcoin conference in San Jose in May, you can hear me talk about it and ask questions at the "Bitcoin in the Future" panel.
The take-away is that buying bitcoins now is the best way to bet that these "child currencies" will be successful. They depend on bitcoin, and if they are successful, bitcoin values will go up.
how does your approach compare to Ripple? |
|
|
|
Ich habe schon mal etwas ausgecashed um zumindest deutlich in's Plus zu kommen. Egal wie's ausgeht, ich kann mich jetzt zurücklehnen  Gruß, Mauline Ausgecasht? in was? Fiat-EUR? Auf der Bank? Zurücklehnen? Mutig mutig. Ganz schöne Zockerin bist du.  Gruß, herzmeister |
|
|
|
|
Viele leben sowieso nich dort, wo sie geboren wurden und ihre Staatsbürgerschaft haben, und sind sozusagen Dauertouristen.
Andere leben auf Booten in Gemeinschaften auf internationalen Gewässern.
|
|
|
|
|
I think there are two flavors of anarcho-capitalism.
1) Anarcho-capitalism as a free market ideology.
2) Anarcho-capitalism as the idea and action of counter-economics, with the goal of hollowing out the state, and establishing a more egalitarian society. In this sense, "anarcho" and "capitalism" shouldn't be a contradiction in terms even for lefties.
|
|
|
|
Will hier kein Bashing betreiben, sondern mich würde die ernste Meinung von anderen Nutzern zu folgender These wissen:
"Der aktuelle Kurs wächst viel zu schnell, im Vergleich zu der BitCoin-Wirtschaft(=Shops)."
So bewertet man einen Markt nicht. Das ist fast so ein Trugschluss wie die Arbeitswerttheorie vom Marx. Es ist eher so: http://falkvinge.net/2013/03/06/the-target-value-for-bitcoin-is-not-some-50-or-100-it-is-100000-to-1000000/Der Kurs spiegelt wider, inwiefern der Bitcoin überhaupt erst mal bekannt ist (frag mal jemanden willkürlich auf der Straße), und dann, was die Leute wetten, wieviel der Bitcoin mal im weltweiten Zahlungs- (und Wertaufbewahrungs-) Markt abdecken wird, und was sie bereit sind, dafür zu riskieren angesichts der möglichen Hindernisse und Risikofaktoren auf dem Weg dorthin. |
|
|
|
wieso virtuell? besser ist real:
Paß wegschmeißen und Reichdeutscher werden.
das sind Leute, die das Gesetz der sog. "BRD" nicht anerkennen. muß man ja auch nicht.
tun ja, diese "Reichsdeutschen" tu aber nun ich nich anerkennen. |
|
|
|
+1
man könnte ein online Wettbüro aufmachen, wer wieviel Jahre kriegt!
so neu und schon so viele sockenpuppen  |
|
|
|
man könnte jedem, der wählen geht 100 BürgerCOINs geben. abstimmen braucht man aber nicht, nur COINs holen geht auch.
löl |
|
|
|
|
Crypto-currency was something new. Had Satoshi publicized the concept more widely, people would not have understood it. So there couldn't have been a wider, fairer range of early adopters.
But now, you could wait until the mainstream largely is familiar with this concept via Bitcoin.
Then make a kickstarter for "Faircoin".
Maybe you'll be successful, and people will accept it thankfully, or maybe not.
|
|
|
|
|
What's wrong with keeping the stored information of the value of my labor?
Why should I consume just for the sake of consumption?
Isn't consumption mania one of the problems of society today?
I use bitcoins wherever I can and whenever I really want something, or for donations. I convert most of my fiat to bitcoin anyway, so it doesn't make much difference to me what I actually spend.
|
|
|
|
I've always said you need a state for property rights. But you don't, really. Rights, boiled down to it, are an agreement. "Property rights," as commonly understood, are simply the agreement: "I don't steal your stuff, you don't steal mine." The thief, having rejected that agreement, has opened himself to retaliation in kind: "You steal my stuff, I'll steal yours." Now, to avoid the chaos of all against all that is commonly called "anarchy," some structure is needed to make things more civilized. This structure need not be a government, and in fact, it's best if it's not. A government, by it's very nature, distorts the agreement: "You don't steal his stuff, and he won't steal yours, but, I can steal from both of you." Not cool. Instead, what AnCap suggests is a system of agencies which provide that same structure, but do so without distorting the agreement: "You don't steal his stuff, and he won't steal yours, but if something does happen, you've both agreed to let me decide how it should be settled." I believe you describe a society in which you are as free as you are wealthy. You can have justice, as long as you can pay for it. To expand on that, you'd probably have an "agency" that gives a fuck about all other agencies and says that Earth belongs to everyone because it is natural common heritage. And most workers would be in this agency because they aren't wealthy. |
|
|
|
The only real problem with communism is that it's against human nature in groups larger than a few hundred. We're primates, at heart, and as such, don't do well with large "communities" Once past a certain limit "community" starts to break down, and sharing with those outside of your community is a foreign concept to the primate mind. Capitalism avoids this, by providing a means by which you can be certain that any interaction - even with a complete stranger - will result in you or your community benefiting. So if communism is better, economically, than capitalism, if it is more efficient, then what I would expect to see is multiple communities, interacting internally via communism, and externally via capitalism, or alternatively, individuals interacting only with friends, and strangers being automatically suspect. yes... Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis. I also think that would approach a model which would largely satisfy most. Our modern "estranged" way of life results from too much separation, as some would argue. It boils down to individual property rights yes or no, I've always said you need a state for property rights. Without a state, you'd have to defend whatever you call your property. A group is surely more efficient to defend (and build) their common property. So the result is communal property "rights" if you will. Now for the global scope, add internet and open source and free sharing of digital data, 3D printing, local production, industrial hemp, etc... I wouldn't abolish it by force, as some Neo-Marxists seem to push for, but money would probably become more and more superfluous. |
|
|
|
entire town constructed and handed to them for free
= top-down. Benevolent, but still top down. Paternalism, treating them like children, basically. That's almost certainly not how human nature works. The Spanish example is something completely different. Bottom-up self-organization. Learning by doing. |
|
|
|
|
MtGox was symbolic. Think banking cartel, "the rich" and governments. So what's the difference to today?
Also I wouldn't even be so sure if it's more energy efficient. Maybe distributed specialized hardware (ASICs) is better than every John Doe with a few coins running their computers instead of just keeping paper wallets, despite all their coins together not even adding up to 50% anyway.
|
|
|
|
I know there's anarcho-communism, but I don't see how that could ever possibly work.
except that it has historical precedence while ancap has not (and don't come me with Iceland). 
Living Utopia (The Anarchists & The Spanish Revolution)
but they were betrayed by state communists and republicans likewise. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
