|
There is the information of what others owe to you from the past, which you can use to (partly) "pay" those who build your house. If you don't have enough "credits", then you will create the information of what you owe in the future to those who build your house.
Again, it's all just information, and it should not have a price in itself. I know it's impossible as it's merely theoretical. That was part of my point I tried to come across with.
|
|
|
|
|
Money is information. That's all it is. Who owes what to whom.
Information is abundant. It's created with every transaction. It's not scarce, it's abundant, while at the same time not inflationary.
Now with today's currencies we cannot meet these requirements. They're impossible to reach with today's tools and technology, for all that we know. Today all money itself is scarce, has a price, be it fiat, gold or bitcoin. This shouldn't be. With an ideal informational currency, there for example wouldn't be any speculation with, as it's just information. But we cannot reach this perfection, only approach it.
Bitcoin is what it is. Maybe not perfect, but solves a lot of problems. To tackle what's missing, I believe an entirely different approach is needed, i.e. not a Freicoin building upon Bitcoin. Ripple comes close, but is based on peer-to-peer relationships of trust, but there are use cases for that (regional trade, business-to-business and supplier/buyer relationships).
Hence I believe it's a dual Bitcoin/Ripple economy that would approach perfection.
|
|
|
|
|
Bit-Pay is first and foremost a payment processor that converts to and fro fiat instantly and transparently. It's optional. Also there can (and will) be competitors. Furthermore, a merchant still can accept bitcoins directly of course.
|
|
|
|
|
LaVey Satanism is extreme individualism.
AynRandism is extreme individualism.
Hence the connection I guess.
|
|
|
|
This guy thinks inflation vs deflation is a game of evil dialectics: http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/the-inflation-vs-deflation-dialectic/However, in a free world, this dichotomy probably wouldn't apply anymore, as there would be various monetary systems active at the same time (I believe Gresham's law wouldn't really apply anymore in today's information society). If a scarce, deflationary currency like gold or bitcoin really stifled liquidity, people would probably resort to community currencies and/or a trust-based barter system like Ripple (with hours of unskilled labor as its base unit). In such a heterogeneous scenario you can then wonder inflation or deflation of what? The question would become irrelevant. |
|
|
|
I'd also like to see a "mixed" society in a strongly decentralized fashion, then everbody can join their respective communities and stop complaining about the system.  Some people are naturally collectivists and like to freely share with others (especially artists), while some are naturally individualists and would prefer a performance-oriented environment. My concern is only that there will be battles for resources between these communities (first on firemost land). |
|
|
|
englischsprachiges "Subforum" ist gut  |
|
|
|
Its harder to do that with bitcoin  For brain wallets, there'll be wireless lie detectors  |
|
|
|
"Donal O'Mahony, Michael Peirce, Hitesh Tewari and now Michael Clear (et al., possibly more)" |
|
|
|
|
Sehr interessante Zusammenfassung @O_Shovah, dankeschön.
|
|
|
|
|
Pirate says he has a dead man's switch.
As most of the bonds and the regular payouts of dividends are issued and maintained by individuals, a bond would become instantly worthless if operation cannot continue unexpectedly. Thus it would be nice if issuers could state if they have similar precautions and if that could be included in the overview.
|
|
|
|
oh... ok then i'll keep my mouth shut also |
|
|
|
everyone else? until after the block reward halves? wha? why? mee stoopid. 'splain me pls.  |
|
|
|
that's what I meant by talking around it, but I wonder if they avoided to mention BTC on purpose? |
|
|
|
Ich hab mein Handy mal in der Waschmaschine mitgewaschen. Handy hat's nich überlebt, die Speicherkarte aber schon.  |
|
|
|
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Misattributed to Isoroku Yamamoto and typical libertarian argument, but there is a truth to that or two. |
|
|
|
They distinguish between different kinds of property: This was because Proudhon distinguished between what he considered to be two distinct forms of property often bound up in the single label. To the mutualist, this is the distinction between property created by coercion and property created by labor. Property is theft "when it is related to a landowner or capitalist whose ownership is derived from conquest or exploitation and [is] only maintained through the state, property laws, police, and an army". Property is freedom for "the peasant or artisan family [who have] a natural right to a home, land [they may] cultivate, [...] to tools of a trade", and the fruits of that cultivation — but not to ownership or control of the lands and lives of others. The former is considered illegitimate property, the latter legitimate property. (In reality the transition is probably smoother though). Thus, no one will rob you off your toothbrush, your flat screen TV, your house, your garden. But if you claim a whole continent as your own, you'll probably run into disagreements. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
