It's not what Bitcoin IS backed by that makes it great, but rather what it ISN'T backed by  Don't ask what Bitcoin can back for you. Ask how you can back Bitcoin.  |
|
|
|
Sollen wir Mittwoch den 13.2. anpeilen? Das wäre wieder der zweite Mittwoch im Monat.
affirmativ! und wo? jemand was vom shamrock gehört? |
|
|
|
"für die virtuelle währung braucht man ein verschlüsseltes online-konto" wa?  |
|
|
|
|
That's exactly what he says is a myth, there is no evidence for it. Adam Smith was not an anthropologist.
|
|
|
|
I didn't read it, I hoped someone would just refer the main point. You did, thanks.
To the quote, I am not much impressed with the reasoning. Of course money existed long before paid armies. Money is not only coins of precious metal with emperors' heads.
Well, then I guess it's your turn to counter Graeber's "zero evidence" argument and deliver some evidence. |
|
|
|
So the point is it didn't evolve, rather it was invented?
yes, did you read the linked interview you quoted above? That's what he says: Taxes are also key to creating the first markets that operate on cash, since coinage seems to be invented or at least widely popularized to pay soldiers – more or less simultaneously in China, India, and the Mediterranean, where governments find the easiest way to provision the troops is to issue them standard-issue bits of gold or silver and then demand everyone else in the kingdom give them one of those coins back again. Thus we find that the language of debt and the language of morality start to merge.
Why should gold and silver coins ever have been grassroots money if almost all that got dug up had heads of leaders on them? This doesn't make sense. He says it's rather that standing armies at borders would pretty soon deplete all food that grows naturally around them pretty quickly. So with those coins they brought their population to grow and sell food to these soldiers. That's how markets arose. The leader's head on the coins hints that they would flow back as taxes. |
|
|
|
Money is an abstract idea, so how could some government/king come up with it?
Well, let's say you owe someone 3 chicken. So what? It's irrelevant as long as there's no law enforcement behind it, which can only come from authority. /cc people piraped at 40. Ancient communities, just like American natives, didn't think in terms of barter, tit-for-tat. They mostly shared among themselves what they hunted and gathered. This is also called primitive communism. What you could argue is that this model didn't stand the test of time. The evolution of mankind favored leaders, conquest, authoritarianism. And I guess Graeber wouldn't deny that a monetary system indeed may allow more efficient allocation of resources than a free sharing model. But he insists that money was an authoritarian invention, to collect taxes and support soldiers. |
|
|
|
|
Kim, as we know in Germany, is some kind of impostor.
He was portrayed in the media as hacker or cracker that he never was.
It was always people around him.
He seems to be somewhat a good marketeer and have talent at executing though. So nothing wrong with that.
But I guess his technical fellows would have to be convinced first then. If they fall for the usual misconceptions and veto, he won't include Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a local community currency... It's the currency of the libertarian nerd community. On a more serious note, I agree with Bernard Lietaer largely. Local currencies are a good idea, sometimes necessary to strengthen local communities and make them more independent. If a poor 3rd world village doesn't have the means to produce anything for the global market, should they starve? No, they can grow their own food and stuffs and trade it among themselves, building their own economic circle, facilitated by a local currency. Greece also has (in a smaller scope) the same problem that they can't export enough stuff anymore after the introduction of the Euro. A globally scoped currency like Bitcoin wouldn't solve that for them either. The more I think about this issue the more clear it becomes that Keynesian economics makes the most sense at the local community level, namely Ithaca hours and similar community currencies
Silvio Gesell's Freigeld makes even more sense at a community level. |
|
|
|
a user should enter their own birthdate and their postal code that was current at the time their brainwallet was created.
Isn't birthdate and postal code alone insufficient because they merely add a well-known and limited set of of data to potential dictionary attacks, especially if this way of setting up brainwallets is somewhat standardized? |
|
|
|
How about people with color blindness?
one word: colorblind. i promise you all this looks quite different to my screwy eyes then to others.
Thank you for reminding us. Maybe use black, darker blue, dark green, normal red, light yellow so that also the colorblind easily can identify the difference. |
|
|
|
So no one ever traded 1 cow for 30 chickens and then traded 1 of those chickens for a horse shoe? Chickens are money in this scenario.
No. That may happen later after previous systems collapse, like in Russia. But that's not what people originally do. He addresses this in all the links already provided.  |
|
|
|
I knew about that, but, is there any way to export the list?
|
|
|
|
Well, it's highly unlikely. Catalans politicians already said that in the case of independence the Euro will remain as the official currency.  Source: I'm Catalan. Euro? I don't get it that they don't get it.  |
|
|
|
|
nee nee, einstellig is vorbei
|
|
|
|
|
Last price:$16.80000
tjo und da hieß es Bitcoin ist inzwischen einigermaßen stabil, so dass solche krassen schwankungen nich mehr vorkommen
|
|
|
|
Billionaires are known for not keeping a lot of spending green in their wallets. But that’s not why Bill Gates hates cash. He hates it because of its effect on people at the opposite end of the wealth spectrum—the world’s poor and unbanked. The Better Than Cash Alliance, which was founded last September and is partially financed by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, hosted a breakfast today at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Speakers from the Philippines, Colombia, and the U.S., among other countries, made the case for why electronic transactions are better than cash payments.
Top five reasons, according to the alliance:
Transparency: Less corruption and theft when payments can be easily tracked. In Afghanistan, U.S. aid agencies use it so workers aren’t so vulnerable to robbery.
Security: The money gets where it’s supposed to go.
Financial inclusion: Electronic payment is a way for unbanked people to establish a record of on-time payment of their bills. This can be an “on-ramp” for them to get other services, such as loans, speakers said.
Cost savings: Moving physical cash around is costlier than zipping electrons. Many poor people, however, still find it cheaper to use cash, because some cashless networks charge high fees.
Access to new markets: This benefit is mainly for providers of financial services.
Kenya is a role model for the developing world when it comes to cashless payment. Its M-Pesa network, launched in 2007, has agents “on every block,” says Neal Keny-Guyer, chief executive of Mercy Corps, a nonprofit that’s a member of the alliance. Mauricio Cárdenas, Colombia’s minister of finance and public credit, said in an interview that he hopes within the year the national legislature will pass a law allowing nonbanks to take in cash and issue electronic vouchers.
The key is ensuring that the people who take in the cash are as well-supervised as bank tellers. “We see this as a first step,” Cárdenas said.  |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
