|
I will buy a money pak code. You send first. Coin base rate.
|
|
|
|
Schiff made that same AppleCoin point too, only more eloquently I think.
What if some organization, say some bank in China, sees the advantages of Bitcoin and makes their own. It's a 1:1 copy of BTC, only they premine it, and also declare that 1 coin is worth 1ounce of gold.
Why would anyone still mine Bitcoin? You could switch your miners to mine this new coin, and boom, you're getting free gold. Then the bank can work in coordination with governments, rich folks, and really just the 1%. The people won't know the difference. To them the utility of using a Cryptocoin is the same whether it's Bitcoin, some AltCoin, or a Chinese BitGoldCoin.
But wait, there's more. Sure you could use BTC. But then good luck securing your coins. That's already a problem. Storage solutions at the moment are just not good. I've personally lost 1BTC that way back in the day. Many people have lost much more. But no need to worry about it with the Chinese BitGoldCoin. It's already being issued by a bank, so they'll also guarantee you safe storage at their servers. It's already a bank. And since it's centralized, there's no need for the community to run full nodes.
It just paints a picture of a theoretical 1%-backed CryptoCoin to do a hell of a lot better with the general public than Bitcoin can do.
That is why we need to develop a viable digital currency. With a definable unit and a elastic supply. We need to make a coin with a standard, some people think of the standard as the backing of the currency, but it is not the convertibility to gold it is the acceptance of the market place that backs the currency. I say we choose a standard/backing and develop a way of expanding and contracting the currency supply fairly and randomly, I suggest 1 unit of currency = 1 joule of work for the standard. |
|
|
|
Madman...lunatic... genius?  |
|
|
|
|
I have a btc-e code for money pak or if you want I can get coin and sell it to you at coin base rate. I am looking for around 250 usd.
|
|
|
|
|
The two examples given above meet the criteria of currency, They were a medium of exchange and a unit of account. They where both definable and where a constant.
|
|
|
|
A baseball card is a medium of exchange, magic cards were designed to be exchanged are they currency?
Baseball cards are designed to be exchanged as a collectable, not as an actual medium-of-exchange.
No, medium of exchange is one function of currency another is unit of account bitcoin is not a unit of account because it is not a unit.
A bitcoin is as much of a unit of value as the US Dollar is, as I have noted repeatedly in this very thread. A unit does not require an external reference, as you seem to claim. All that is required that a unit exist, is that more than a few people agree upon a (preferablely not vague, but even that is not a requirement; take a look at the variance in the concept of a "cord" of firewood) standard. The bitcoin exchange markets set the 'standard' of price for a bitcoin on an ongoing basis. But in the long term, a bitcoin is a bitcoin in as much as a dollar is a dollar.
If it is a currency it is going for the the most useless currency of all time... in other words if bitcoin is a currency it is a shit one.
Okay. Your opinion is well known on this matter, but it doesn't change the fact that Bitcoin is a currency. You are a Ron Paul supporter right? Why advocate for something that wont work? It isnt valuable as a commodity and doesnt work as a currency.
Just because it may not work for you as a currency, doesn't mean it doesn't work for me. I've used it as such on numerous occasions in the past. I expect to continue to do so; but even if I'm wrong about such an expectation does not imply that Bitcoin is not presently a currency, because it provably is. A Continental was a currency once as well, but that doesnt' mean that they must be 'worth a Continental' today to have been a currency in 1778. Maybe Bitcoin will fade away like so many others here believe, and maybe it won't; but if I can buy stuff online using Bitcoin, and only Bitcoin, in trade; then Bitcoin is a currency now, regardless of how or why that is so. Ya I agree that is a problem. The dollar is not currency either and look at the world as a result. Look at how trade doesnt have to balance, currency wars, manipulation, massive budget deficits, the inequality of labor rates world wide, boom and bust cycles, and asset bubbles |
|
|
|
An asset is something that generates revenue, bitcoin does that.
Bitcoin does not generate revenue. Bitcoin goes up and down in market value, that is quite different.
A stock is an asset and is speculative for the most part people invest in stocks for capital gain,
While a stock is often a speculative investment vehicle, stocks are (at the core) contractual evidence that you own a definable piece of a business venture; which (presumedly) exists to turn a profit. It's the profit that makes the stock an asset, not it's speculative nature. but that is fine if you want to call it a commodity instead of an asset
Nor is it a commodity, because it has no non-monetary utility. No one desires to aquire bitcoins for their own sake, but to spend or sell them at a later date. You can't really do anything else with them, at least not yet. (Colored coins might change that analysis later)
so long as you dont call it currency which it clearly is not.
Bitcoin is a currency, as I noted in the "bitcoin is not a currency" thread on several occasions.Bullshit! |
|
|
|
@OP By definition , currency is usually backed, defined and produced by a government or some authority.
I know I wish the rest of this community realized that. |
|
|
|
|
A baseball card is a medium of exchange, magic cards were designed to be exchanged are they currency? No, medium of exchange is one function of currency another is unit of account bitcoin is not a unit of account because it is not a unit.
If it is a currency it is going for the the most useless currency of all time... in other words if bitcoin is a currency it is a shit one.
You are a Ron Paul supporter right? Why advocate for something that wont work? It isnt valuable as a commodity and doesnt work as a currency.
|
|
|
|
|
An asset is something that generates revenue, bitcoin does that. A stock is an asset and is speculative for the most part people invest in stocks for capital gain, but that is fine if you want to call it a commodity instead of an asset so long as you dont call it currency which it clearly is not.
|
|
|
|
Is the community ready to admit that it is not currency? Of course not. Bitcoin is, by definition and design, a currency. Your arguments are rediculous. No one can define bitcoin that is the problem. I can and have. Your problem is that you won't accept my definition of "currency". Really what was the definition again? |
|
|
|
Is the community ready to admit that it is not currency? Of course not. Bitcoin is, by definition and design, a currency. Your arguments are rediculous. No one can define bitcoin that is the problem and I am not the only one saying it. Peter Shciff, Gary north, Paul krugman, the central bank of china, business insider and many more |
|
|
|
Is the community ready to admit that it is not currency? |
|
|
|
Cool, so we get to keep the increasing value of the currency as opposed to having the central banks siphon the value out of the dollars in my bank account? You feel more comfortable with the idea of your money losing value so you have to spend it right away?
The only reasons I'm not using my bitcoins thus far
A) I'm not being paid in bitcoins
B) Few are accepting them directly.
I'm not converting to fiat and back just to dip into my holdings. As soon as I can just do away with handling fiat and pay my rent in btc I shall do so.
When it takes off with gusto in 2014-2015, then I'll be using them as currency instead of just holding them
And they are not going to start accepting them.. they cant. It is not currency it is an asset but what kind of asset is it? |
|
|
|
Why is every popular post on this forum about Bitcoin failing? Why does anyone respond to these posters? Isn't it a better idea to just let them sink to the bottom of the cesspool and focus on more positive things?
Like more bitcoiners donning pink tutus. Tutus are nice and all but my motivation is to remove the money power from government and the elite. That cant happen while we are fucking around with bullshit pseudo currencies like bitcoin. It is a little difficult to watch there were a couple of tech problems, but check it out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV-32qmLG64 |
|
|
|
|
Those are all real problems but most are relatively easy to fix... The real reason that bitcoin is doomed to fail is that it is not currency. The fatal flaw with bitcoin is that it is not definable and has a fixed supply.
1 unit of currency = 1 joule of work!!!
|
|
|
|
Great and erudite analysis of why all TA is utterly useless, unless you have inside knowledge of what the big movers are about to do or know news before others do.
Which is why financial markets have a preponderance of insider knowledge cheats and market manipulators, it's the only thing that gives you an edge.
Perhaps it is possible to learn about sentiments, meaning sometimes it is possible to have a good idea of how others are likely to react - but this is again at best marginal and can of course go horribly wrong.
This thread is burning a straw man. Having a p value of less than 100% is different from being useless. TA is less about being always right, and more about how much confidence you put in being right at any particular point. How much you make when you are right, vs how much you lose when you aren't is what makes it valuable or not. For example: RP gave himself an 80% p value for that prediction. He may be right or not, but either way it isn't going to be indicative of whether TA is useful of not, just whether that application of it worked well or didn't. What you have here is an analogy and a theory. Science uses data, so from that point RP's TA is more scientific than your criticism of it. Markets aren't pendulums. In any efficient market TA should yield zero edge over random chance. That said, Bitcoin markets have demonstrated, time and again, startling examples of inefficiency. The scientific way to settle this argument is to create 30 TA algos that backtest well, simulate them them for a year, and find out if there's statistical significance. Just the fact that other traders use TA makes it viable as a predictive indicator. |
|
|
|
*looks at the poll* fun fact 2.2% of bitcoiners are so high off SR drugs they don't know weather or not they buy things with bitcoin.  What is the purpose of the poll? it means nothing. Why not ask how many people used their magic the gathering cards to buy things? |
|
|
|
Great trader he got to the store and bought a MP in record time. Thanks ! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
