Silverfuturist on bitcoin.

[John Tobey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgYamdGLuA4

Quite sad that he is also going for the Ponzi scheme thing... actually it is an insult to all the early adopters, who are entrepreneurs!

Well, I don't think he understands the beauty of the block chain.  The Bitcoin "bag holder" still has private keys and proof of a lot of work attesting to their value.

But the early Bitcoin adopters got too much.  Not "too much" in the sense of "unfair" nor in the sense of "I want them" or "it can't work", but enough to plague the currency with exchange rate volatility for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps even enough to limit the exchange value's upside.

[1714119359]

1714119359

[1714119359]

1714119359

[1714119359]

1714119359

[rezin777]

But the early Bitcoin adopters got too much.  Not "too much" in the sense of "unfair" nor in the sense of "I want them" or "it can't work", but enough to plague the currency with exchange rate volatility for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps even enough to limit the exchange value's upside.

I don't think we would be where we are today if it was done differently.I don't think many people would be interested if Bitcoin inflated as the user base grew, or if mining paid less in the beginning, etc. I realize others disagree, but I guess we will never know.

[SpaceLord]

But the early Bitcoin adopters got too much.  Not "too much" in the sense of "unfair" nor in the sense of "I want them" or "it can't work", but enough to plague the currency with exchange rate volatility for the foreseeable future.  Perhaps even enough to limit the exchange value's upside.

I don't think we would be where we are today if it was done differently.I don't think many people would be interested if Bitcoin inflated as the user base grew, or if mining paid less in the beginning, etc. I realize others disagree, but I guess we will never know.

I think it depends on the timing of large investment interests versus the bailout of the very early adopters.

[kwhcoin]

I learn a lot from regularly watching silverfuturist's videos on youtube. I actually found out about Bitcoin because he kept talking about it. If he reads this, then I hope he does a video on my hypothetical modified version of bitcoins called kilowatt-hour coins:
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=16900.0

I think he would like the hypothetical kwhcoin concept because it addresses a number of concerns he raised in his videos about Bitcoin.

[andes]

More attacks from silver/gold bugs against Bitcoin (doom and gloomers):

The Bitcoin dream has officially ended. Game over.
-TheWeeklyTelegram
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IUeenH9P6Y

[Tx2000]

My brain hurts watching that guy.

[andes]

And a centered response to the last video

Bitcoin crash? No, just a company hacked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pCew9YF5Sk&feature=channel_video_title

[bitcola]

Every time someone says that it is ponzi due to early adopters, the BTC proponents come out with "but you get that with companies".

Companies are not the same thing. They don't create currency out of nowhere. They redistribute existing wealth.

Miners don't create wealth. They print money. They are simply limited by algorithms but it is still the printing of money.

So what happens when there are one thousand variants of bitcoin? Then what? 1,000 printed currencies backed by nothing.


People are not happy with early adopters making money out of printing money. That will be a major obstacle to them supporting this currency. And when they realise that BTC is not the one and only possible virtual currency (it might be survivable if it were, despite being backed on nothing) then the value of BTC will dilute and become worthless.


Effectively, it IS ponzi, because it is backed on nothing. Corporations are NOT backed on nothing so will Bitcoin proponents PLEASE think for themselves for once and quit quoting the FAQ of the creator. You are in self-denial.

[libertyzeal]

Miners don't create wealth. They print money. They are simply limited by algorithms but it is still the printing of money.

A crucial, critical misunderstanding here.  Miners compute blocks that increase the block chain, the block chain is what "secures" the currency from fraudulent transactions, this work re-enforces the value of the currency, "printing money" does the opposite, it debases the value of a currency.. The security of the block chain has value (ie wealth).. it not only protects the bitcoin network from fraud, it also makes it something very hard to compete with, since any new digital currency will have to start from scratch and play catchup.

[bitcola]

You effectively said that major currencies like EUR and $ are ponzis. Good job.

Non-fiat money is ultimately doomed. Yes, they are ponzis. Just look at how government can print them out ad infinitum. But at least they have some backing in terms of government guarantees.

What backing does BTC have? Absolutely zilch.

Right now, it has a lot of trust among those who use it. But if 10,000 new virtual currencies can get created, each with their own early adopters who profit from mining, what happens then? It all breaks down. People realise that there is zero intrinsic value in bitcoins.

A currency has to be backed by "something", no matter how weak it is.

[bitcola]

Miners don't create wealth. They print money. They are simply limited by algorithms but it is still the printing of money.

A crucial, critical misunderstanding here.  Miners compute blocks that increase the block chain, the block chain is what "secures" the currency from fraudulent transactions, this work re-enforces the value of the currency, "printing money" does the opposite, it debases the value of a currency.. The security of the block chain has value (ie wealth).. it not only protects the bitcoin network from fraud, it also makes it something very hard to compete with, since any new digital currency will have to start from scratch and play catchup.

Security has value to those who use it but this is not real value, comparable to holding precious metals, commodities or real currency. It is value only to those who participate in the scheme.

You are right about printing money. It debases the value of the currency. And the mining aspect of bitcoins is essentially what will lead to its ultimate downfall.

Just because mining is limited by an algorithm, just because mining brings some benefits - doesn't mean that the concept is not fundamentally flawed. If BTC was the only virtual currency in existence in this manner, ever, then on trust alone it might work.

However, there is nothing stopping others creating 10,000 other virtual currencies. Imagine if you did that? Heck, why not create 10 million virtual currencies and give 600 people each on the planet the opportunity to mine too? Then we can ALL get rich 

Can't you see the flaw now? What makes BTC so special against these 9,999 other currencies? Nothing at all.

[libertyzeal]

You effectively said that major currencies like EUR and $ are ponzis. Good job.

What backing does BTC have? Absolutely zilch.

It's backed by the block chain.  Right now the computational power to crack the block chain is more costly than any monetary benefits you'd get from corrupting it.  Sure, someone else could create a digital currency, but it's not going to be secured initially, and it takes a lot of work to get it there.

The dollar and other fiat currencies are backed by governments..that's pretty safe right, cause we all know that no governments are ever overthrown or debase their currencies out of existence, right?  No risk here..

[libertyzeal]

Miners don't create wealth. They print money. They are simply limited by algorithms but it is still the printing of money.

A crucial, critical misunderstanding here.  Miners compute blocks that increase the block chain, the block chain is what "secures" the currency from fraudulent transactions, this work re-enforces the value of the currency, "printing money" does the opposite, it debases the value of a currency.. The security of the block chain has value (ie wealth).. it not only protects the bitcoin network from fraud, it also makes it something very hard to compete with, since any new digital currency will have to start from scratch and play catchup.

Can't you see the flaw now? What makes BTC so special against these 9,999 other currencies? Nothing at all.

Momentum, if it was so easy, then why isn't anyone else doing it, why aren't you doing?  You can't just cobble together a P2P network and have something more trusted, secure, and globally recognized as easy as you can brush your teeth.

[noedaRDH]

Not going to take any advice from a jittery chicken hoarder living out in the woods who probably kicks his own computer.

[QuantumMechanic]

What makes BTC so special against these 9,999 other currencies?

Its established network of users.  Just like gold's, except much smaller and less established.

[andes]

You effectively said that major currencies like EUR and $ are ponzis. Good job.

What backing does BTC have? Absolutely zilch.

A currency has to be backed by "something", no matter how weak it is.

Ha ha! Then tell me what backs gold.

[BitVapes]

You effectively said that major currencies like EUR and $ are ponzis. Good job.

A currency has to be backed by "something", no matter how weak it is.

Ha ha! Then tell me what backs gold.

it is the properties of gold that back it up.   scarce, doesn't tarnish, fungible, etc

similarly, it is the properties of bitcoin that back up its value

[andes]

I discovered that both of the most aggressive anti-bitcoin guys on youtube: rawdog and theweeklytelegram delete their past videos/accounts every couple of weeks or months, so they cannot be held accountable.

The weeklytelegram deleted all his videos about 4 weeks ago, then he made a couple of videos bashing bitcoin, then he deleted all his videos again last week, then he made a new video bashing bitcoin today.

Rawdog deleted his account a couple of weeks ago (deleting all his videos), and created a new one a couple of weeks ago.

How would you call this kind of public people that pathologically "clean their digital past" in a regular manner? Quite strange to me... Why being a public person and destroying your credibility this way?

Should we call them "digital amnesiacs?", "cyber Schizophreniacs?".... hmmm...

[andes]

.

[bitcola]

it is the properties of gold that back it up.   scarce, doesn't tarnish, fungible, etc

similarly, it is the properties of bitcoin that back up its value

Gold has physical properties that give it value. BTC has none of these physical properties.