Nothing has intrinsic value except for perhaps basic necessities like food and shelter. These things do not act well as forms of money because the former rots and the latter is immobile and indivisible.
That's a narrow definition of intrinsic value. |
|
|
|
Well,r are you a human being capable of rational thought or a capitalistbot stuck in a profit loop?
Are you capable of grasping the idea that some people's moral system just might be different from your? Then why are you content with the idea of employing someone and being his boss? Employees welcome to quit any time he doesn't like the arrangement. If that is called controlling, then so be it. yes, a thief. For the record, most of my bitcoin are earned through economic exchanges. I never stolen anything from anyone. |
|
|
|
The original article talks about the dollar being backed by force (specifically since people are coerced into paying obligations to the US government using dollars.)
If bitcoins are in use for a while and legal contract are written requiring the paying of obligations in bitcoin then bitcoins will have a little bit of the same kind of backing as the dollar. Someone could be coerced (by the courts) into seeking out bitcoins to pay off obligations. In that sense bitcoins will have intrinsic "value".
We could grow into this kind of world because bitcoin has advantages paper dollars don't. Contracts may start to be written denominated in bitcoin.
The problem with bitcoin is that it is not legal tender. If a country recognize it as legal tender, than bitcoin would indeed...have "backing". Of course, it's a bad kind of backing. |
|
|
|
Here's what I posted there:
This obsession with 'backing' demonstrates a gross failure to understand the subjective theory of value.
What backs gold??? Nothing other than the subjective valuations of individuals. The same is true of fiat currencies, except here individual subjective valuations concern matters such as 'not getting arrested' or 'not getting shot.'
Bitcoin is a great form of money. That why people value it. While gold is great form of money in addition of having useful properties outside of money, that we called intrinsic value.(Not to be confused with the idea of objects having inherent value.) The worry is that one of those confidence crisis could spark people to abandon bitcoin as money forever. Without intrinsic value, there is no reason why people should continue to use bitcoin. |
|
|
|
As are all forms of money, government "backed" or not.
Supposedly, government money are backed by the force of gun. Though, gold have useful properties so people would alway use it as industrial application. Bitcoin is practically nothing without being used as a medium of exchange. |
|
|
|
No way. He didn't come off as someone who understood Bitcoin very well in that podcast, so he couldn't be satoshi unless he purposely tried to sound less knowledgeable. Also spyware creation/prevention doesn't have anything to do with cryptography as far as I know so that part of the argument is worthless. People like theymos or gavin are way more likely to be satoshi in my opinion.
Steve Gibson definitely understood bitcoin. |
|
|
|
That's normal anarchism (non ancap) you're describing.
From an economist's viewpoint, I think property right incentivize people to produce and prevents/minimize conflicts. It just make sense. It is only incidental that some political philosophies endorse it. However, it is safe to said that anarcho-capitalists believe in homesteading too. |
|
|
|
So a libertarian/ancap society can have limits on how much property a person can possess?
I think you gotta be able to make these lands productive. It doesn't matter if you don't consume it yourself. I mean, if there's an abandoned factory that nobody was taking for a whole years or that there is no guards for a whole year...then I think it would make sense to take the property and homestead it. Of course, the whole question of stickability of property is a big issue. I think a good rule of thumb is that it should a) prevent conflict b) incentivize the owner/capitalist to develop the property. A good example of this conflict is the Discovery Channel's The Colony. The colonists homestead a factory they thought was abandoned and that nobody was using it. They build a lot of things to make it their. For example, they increase the security of factory. They installed solar panel scavenged from local sources. They construct various apparatus that make life living in the colony more bearable. Of course, the original owner and his girlfriend came. The colonists recognize them as equal co-owners because they have the key to the place. However, they squandered resources so much that the colonist have to kick them out. |
|
|
|
|
Is there any more effort to redesign the website?
|
|
|
|
The House of Saud permits people to live on their land with certain agreed-upon restrictions, one of which is that they can't have property. Is this agreement not something a person should be allowed to set up on their property in a libertarian society?
That's a big land claim. I can't imagine homesteading that much properties. |
|
|
|
This video is a seriously great bitcoin achievment.
I mean: it has been funded thanks to a bitcoin bounty. It's kind of a proof of concept by itself.
The granddaddy and biggest of all Bitcoin bounty, nonetheless! |
|
|
|
|
Will Satoshi be taking a look at this video?
|
|
|
|
Is this immoral?
Certainly not. Everyone made a deal they were happy with. At that time, it was a deal that everyone was happy with. However, the artist somehow underestimate his own popularity or how good his artwork is. That's just business. |
|
|
|
Is this immoral?
I believe that you are the only one who is morally outraged. |
|
|
|
Socialism is very much about equality.
I don't believe in the goal of equality. |
|
|
|
The term Anarchism has been in use for over 100 years to mean more than just anti-government or lack of government. It is only relatvity recently that "capitalists who don't like states" have started to claim the term for themselves.
Also, you haven't really addressed the question in the second part of your post. I originally from a country where the land was effectively stolen from the original inhabitants by Europeans. That's a single example of a past wrong, which can't be addressed by magical hand waving. There are many more recent examples of governments, and/or powerful individuals or other groups, just stealing resources (including land). Yet this is now recognized by all the other states.
I am not responsible for my ancestor's wrongdoing to another. As far as I know, one of my ancestor probably got raped and have a baby. |
|
|
|
|
There is no clear call to action on the front page of weusecoins.com.
"Ok, I like this bitcoin idea. How do I get started?"
I think there should be BIG CLEAR TEXT that said "Great! How do I get started?" that replace the Features below.
|
|
|
|
Members of the bitcoin community? sure. Members of the bitcoin.org community? Not so sure.
Otherwise they would have mentionned bitcoin.org at the end of their video.
But again: it's ok if they mention their own website. It is their work after all. But if we want to use this video, it worths warning the viewer.
What's the difference between bitcoin.org community and bitcoin community? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
