I agree with this under a physical metal standard...but Bitcoin is the game-changer. It's a final means of payment but, unlike metals, it has virtually zero carrying costs. We have never had a hard asset like this in all of human history. Bitcoin is actually very expensive to run and maintain. You'll see that once bitcoin gets widely adopted and blockchain bloated to unforeseen limits. Even now you have to offer something like Electrum bitcoin client and server to decrease this cost! And that basically means you are introducing certain lever of trust making the tradeoff I've mentioned above! I've come to the conclusion that Ripple cannot destroy Bitcoin anymore than USD has been able to destroy gold. You are quite right! But why do you fail to recognize that the dollar successfully managed to destroy gold as money for 40 years? Bitcoin doesn't have a 6000 year of history as money like gold. What will happen to bitcoin if it doesn't get widely adopted as money for the next 40 years? My point is that trust based money ultimately fail if there are no built in mechanisms to check them against reality. However, they are very efficient in a normal economy and can exist for a very large periods of time practically destroying the use of other monetary values! |
|
|
|
So I fail to see the relevancy of your post as a reply to my OP. A victory for bitcoin will be if you attract people that are currently looking for safety in fiat currencies, not those that are looking for safety in PMs! |
|
|
|
Man it sure seems we're just on the cusp of new and bigger avalanche of users that are about to (re)discover and finally adopt Bitcoin!  There is no difference in being a hardcore goldbug and being a hardcore cryptobug. It is the same mentality. |
|
|
|
Apologies in advance, I've rewritten this post three times now trying to shorten it. Sadly, each attempt has caused it to grow by at least a paragraph. Just be thankful that I cut out the detour through the historic origins of debt and money.
Bitcoin and ripple are both attempts to make new electronic systems that more closely approach the abstract ideal of "money", but they do so in totally different ways.
Certain things have properties that make them more or less useful as money, but in the abstract sense, money is a means of splitting a barter transaction into two parts that can happen at different times, in different places, and between different people.
Essentially, if you buy a product or service from someone, you are getting wealth from them, and in return you give them money, which is (again, in the abstract sense) an IOU for wealth of similar value in the future. They can then take that IOU and give it to someone else in exchange for a product or service. In effect, they are performing a barter where they exchange one thing of value for another thing of value, with the money just as an intermediate step. In the time that they are holding the money, they have given, but not yet received; they are owed a debt, not by one particular person, but by society in general.
Ripple is an attempt to transfer this abstract debt relationship into the electronic world, making something closer to the abstract ideal of "money" than the ledger and paper/coin system we use now. The ripple system just helps turn your personal IOU that you give as payment into a general IOU, which is the same job that money does in a transaction. In the end, both systems require a functional society willing and able to pay back those IOUs, and both systems can be open ended and (more or less) eternal.
All money, including bitcoin, ripple, dollars and even gold, are based on debt. Holding gold means (more or less) that you have done something worth that gold's value, and you hope that in the future you'll be able to exchange that gold for something of similar value. Dollars and ripple are the same, with a couple of subtle differences. In dollars, certain players can create new debt (new dollars) at will, limited only by the willingness of people to accept them. When you get a bank loan (or a credit card or whatever) that bank has created new dollars out of thin air by magic, limited only by their assessment of your ability to repay. In ripple, everyone is a bank, and everyone can create money through magic, just by finding someone willing to accept it.
Gold and bitcoin, though based on debt/hope just dollars and ripple, have the advantage that no one can conjure them at will. Gold and bitcoin are both past-looking, where holding gold or bitcoin is prima facie evidence that a party has already in the past done something of value for society. Dollars and ripple are more forward looking, where one party has received something of value, and the other party is hoping that they will do something of similar value in the future to redeem that particular debt.
The forward looking version of money didn't grow up by accident. It is a good system, and it works. It has produced the amazing world we all live in today. But it has also brought us horrifying tragedy, with new horrors brewing on the not-so-distant horizon. I think that we are perched on a turning point in world history. We will pick either the advantages and disadvantages of future-oriented systems like dollars and ripple, or we will pick the advantages and disadvantages of past-oriented systems like gold and bitcoin. It isn't a one-sided choice, we are both gaining and losing either way.
But I suspect that the brewing storm will steer the next few centuries towards bitcoin (or something like it).
Very well said, kjj. I agree with most of the points you make. However, instead of past-looking and forward looking time vector of monetary systems, I prefer to use trust and distrust based money. If you have gold, silver, or bitcoin you have the ultimate proof that you have already done something useful in the past. This is why there is no need for trust/hope since you already have the proof in place. While money based on debt, like current fiat and ripple, they are based entirely on trust/hope that you will do something useful in future. The problem with trust based money is that very often this trust is abused. Very complicated systems are used to backup such a trust with something material like real estate. Very often the price of the collateral is changing and needs to be marked to market, inflicting further changes to the reasonable level of trust. Distrust based money is almost perfect, but almost... The problem is that they are just too expensive to maintain and use every day. They are relatively expensive to trust based monetary systems in a normal economy. I don't think we are on the verge of making a choice between trust or distrust based money. This is a simple question of efficiency! Economy doesn't care about principles but efficiency. A well balanced monetary system will make use of both trust and distrust based money and will be based on a dynamic trade off. For every day use people will use trust based money since they are cheaper to use and from time to time outstanding credit balances will have to be cleared through distrust based money like gold, silver, or bitcoin that are firmly anchored in the real or digital world. |
|
|
|
Why it is necessary to launder bitcoins anyway?
Why did you chose a nickname SAFEVoucher instead of using your real name? |
|
|
|
|
The XRP currency as a choice on Ripple's website should be removed asap or it'll compromise the really valuable idea behind this project!
|
|
|
|
Assuming future scandals are in the cards - where people repudiate Ripple debts on the premise they were hacked and the IOUs are forged and therefore aren't valid (you know this will happen at least as often as paypal "my account was hacked" chargebacks), no court is going to blindly swallow the presumption that "the ripple network says so, so it must be so!". Sure, this is a pretty big risk.. In a system like Ripple there are several ways you can deal with such a risk. One of the best IMO is in addition to absolute IOU limit to introduce relative IOU limits between persons/entities in a given group. Thus, it'll be meaningless to hack individual accounts because to increase the individual IOU 'credit line' you have to hack every individual account within that group. |
|
|
|
But it won't be very revolutionary if it is good for nothing more than a bunch of coworkers settling up on who pays for lunch. Reminds me how bitcoin started with the first to buy pizza with bitcoins agreeing upon paying 10,000... |
|
|
|
|
I don't see Ripple IOU's as debt. I see Ripple IOU's as the price of a friendship or if you like the price of trust you have in some other person. If business relations are concerned I see Ripple IOU's as the price of a business reputation!
|
|
|
|
Hello all. I'm terrible sorry for not responding to this earlier. A mix of personal issues with searching for a solution prevented me from it. Unfortunately, I have very bad news. I cannot currently proccess your withdrawals. The situation is very complicated and it's all my fault, that's why I feel terrible about it. I tried to make this up, to keep the site afloat and somehow recover the funds, but it's not possible anymore. Right now there are 1786 BTC pending withdrawal, which I can't honor... Earlier this year, I had this "genius" idea which led me to making a fatal mistake. I thought I could provide a hedge fund service for Bitmarket users. There were other sites providing this service so I guesses that it could be successful. I had experience in trading before, all I needed is a platform. And there was one - Bitcoinica. I was so convinced with this idea (and sooo wrong in hindsight) that for a while I kept majority of "offline" Bitmarket funds there. What I didn't expect was that one day it could just dissapear - taking all the money with it. What's worse, the funds were shorted when it happened (converted to USD and sold) - and after Bitcoinica dissapeared BTC price rose by about 250% until now. So while there is still chance to recover the funds (there is an appointed liquidator assigned to this case and I've already sent in claims) it will be not enough to cover all people's funds. For the record - there are 20161 19980 BTC missing (edit: I subtracted my funds that also were deposited on Bitmarket), and Bitcoinica claims total for around 50K USD (the exact amount is uncertain because the liquidators haven't yet stated at what rate they will liquidate positions). Sadly, I alone, I'm out of options. I don't have own money to pay for this loss (Bitmarket never made any real profit and I make up for a living by part-time web/mobile programming). The options for making this up for everyone as I see are: - find an investor (or investors) that is willing to cover at least part of is debt. I would transfer all rights to the website software, servers and database to him and also work as a technician, possibly also implementing features he'd wanted. If you reading this have the funds necessary to make this work, PLEASE contact me on this. - freeze all current funds and "start over" trading with explicit fees, implementing much-needed features like rating system and others. All profits from the fees would go directly to a fund for repaying the debt. I'm afraid that this option alone is not enough though - many people won't (and have full right to do so) trust the site again... - something else? Again, I would like to deeply apologize to everyone involved with this. I'm really sorry  . I made a fatal mistake and I have to deal with it now. If you thinking about sueing me about this - you have full right to do so, but I don't think it's a good idea - I don't have any money so winning a case will get nothing for you and possibly ruin my life . It also would prevent me from doing anything to alleviate this situation, and I really want to make this up for everyone and I'm willing to do anything in my power to do this. I had many sleepless nights thinking about how I can make this tight. I just need some help with this. Last, but not least... If you have any bitcoin you can donate to help users that have locked funds, please send them here: 1Km5GFMat1DXcbvMTeH9ZvLGKvFCLBA9dMAll received Bitcoins will go directly to process withdrawals. I will update how much is left in this thread. I hope this post is the first step towards resolving the mix of personal issues you've mentioned about. It won't be easy of course, but this is the right direction. Just be honest with people that are really trying to help you! |
|
|
|
We advice you to decide on a wall of your choice to stand against in due time, good sir. *presses X* You should have pressed 'Y' or 'Z'. The 'X' was my TV channel. Wife and kids get nervous without TV. |
|
|
|
This is a disturbingly recurring theme on these forums. You're disturbingly recurring on every forum I post. Take a break! |
|
|
|
My take on this is that sometimes you have to make a revolutionary change if you want to succeed.
True, I made mine, have fun, make yours  Déjà vu. I'm just returning from where you're going to and I'm having fun. This is good we both have fun. Good luck entering the world of 'real' bankers and telling other people this is a revolutionary change. I know that pressure against all 'classic' bitcoin exchanges from local authorities is increasing and will further increase. So, I can't really blame you. Just make sure you're really capable of looking at bitcoin-central from a banker's point of view. Make no mistake; it's a cat and mouse game. |
|
|
|
... and then there won't be links with the old rails, and Bitcoin will be far weaker and less useful. Arguments? I don't think bitcoin will be weaker and less useful. Just the opposite. The less effective is the interface between bitcoin and fiat money the faster will be bitcoin adoption and transition to new monetary system! Which transition is best for the society? The avalanche style transition or slowly melting glacier? My take on this is that sometimes you have to make a revolutionary change if you want to succeed. Sometimes evolution just gives you less chances to succeed and at the end will be much more expensive for the society. Wasn't it better to let banks fail in 2008? |
|
|
|
It would be pretty ironic if one way for evil banksters to hurt us, would be to actually join us, wouldn't it? Ok, let me ask you this question. If you have tied your fortunes to bitcoin and your life depends on the profits you make operating bitcoin based business when will you support transactions in alternative competing criptocurrency and 'interface' your system with theirs? |
|
|
|
Also, people need to be careful to distinguish between "manipulating markets" and "influencing markets". Do you know what LIBOR is? Do you know how is it technically calculated by the panel of member banks? If a bank offers interbank deposits at a certain interest rate in effect only to other member banks this is not just "influencing markets" or "manipulating markets". This is rigging markets! |
|
|
|
But they don't quite have the international power to manipulate prices and or affect economy the way Rob E seems to assume. Banks do manipulate prices in unprecedented scale giving absolutely false signals to the real economy. This is why economic uncertainty for ordinary entrepreneurs is increasing. People claiming the opposite just don't know what they are talking about! |
|
|
|
It is more like the US breaking away from Europe to be independent, then immediately trading and investing with 'the enemy'. Sure. I doubt though if the War of Independence is behind or in front of us and who were/are the loyalists? |
|
|
|
Mostly from the practical viewpoint - there is endless supply of people bitching about other people's actions*, while there is only a small group of people who do some real work and get stuff done. Well, some people call it democracy. |
|
|
|
There is no ideology in bitcoin itself, it is just a tool...
...
focus on doing something productive yourself that promotes your ideals and goals for the society.
Hmm, do you see the contradiction? How is promoting your ideals and goals for the society any different from promoting an ideology!? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
