What the Early Adoptors Don't want you to know

[malditonuke]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

For some reason, I don't give two shits when someone says they have an economics degree.

Maybe it's because such degrees are frequently held by people like Ben Bernanke.

Would it help if I told you I was a chief then?  Ben Bernake is also a man, do you only take economic arguments from girls?

I suppose I should have been more to the point and said that mentioning your econ degree probably doesn't mean much around here, so I wouldn't lead off with it if I were you.

Don't rely on titles to get respect.  Expect to have to earn respect with your actions around here.  Sounds good, right?

[1715012765]

1715012765

[1715012765]

1715012765

[truthcracker]

Some freemarket - this is not the implementation of an idea I support - wait for bitcoins II or III or a similar idea which is more fairly distributed - the only way they are going to get money for free is from YOU when you buy THEIR bitcoins.  And who's going to buy them from you?

Why other people of course? As with any item of value, theres always new buyers (new people being born everyday for one) and a market. Of course competition and profits may drop in the future but what the future holds for Bitcoin really is a guessing game at this stage. IMO its never been done before.

Best you get in now.

I don't see a flood of vendors and end users I see a flood of speculators and cheer leaders with vested interests.  Exchanging almost free virtual coins for real work does not sound like a system that will catch on.  It effectively forms a prisoners dilemma for the large early adopters which will end in 'cartel' style 'cheating' - then the speculators will dump and you are back to the geeks and the few bruised vendors.  Early adopters sneakily praise the technology and bash the system, but they are really participating in a ridiculous self enrichment scheme.

I'd give it 3 months.  There is absolutely no reason it had to be set up this way.  If it was a market solution the amount of bitcoins in circulation would be determined by buy in via the us dollar then a floating exchange - the reason its done this way with a limited supply and then divisibility to encourage a reckless rush of speculators which will enrich the early adoptors, never be taken up by vendors because the price is speculator driven, and then crash.

Still, as most people are doing it out of greed I don't feel that sorry for them.  I feel sorry for the people who are only looking at the rhetoric.

[truthcracker]

What the hell is a Nebbie?  or a Nebie?

Also, how can anyone possibly look at these forums and pretend that deflation is a big secret that we are trying to hide from the masses?  You can hardly swing a cat in here without hitting a dozen threads on the subject, including the one and only sticky topic in the Economics forum.

Why are people trying to suppress the point that the system is ?

 Life is unfairly designed just look at children dying from hunger in Africa or children born with disability , if you dont like bitcoin go take code change it and make bitcoin 2.0 and you will BE early adoptors but stop complain how unfair it is. Good luck.

I am thinking about how I can do that, or promote a system that does.

[Oldminer]

Why do you think its safe to say that most professionals only parrot what they have been taught?  That's very broad.  I mean it includes all disciplines and people graduating from them - how does the world manage to maintain doctors, engineers and historians?  Where is the true store of knowledge - TV and Wiki?

Well put it this way. You only know what you know by reading a book. I can go read those same books and I'll come out qualified. But qualified at what? Did I learn anything new? Did I learn anything that wasnt already known? No. I am simply qualified to profess what is in those books.

Some of the greatest minds to ever walk this planet were 'uneducated'. Some of the greatest inventions were invented by uneducated people. People who not always followed the mainstream thinking/profession. Remember when the 'educated' institutions claimed the world was flat? It took someone to dare to go against the grain of mainstream belief to say it was round. And what ultimately put him in the position where he was proven right and the 'institution' of the day was proven wrong? Their 'belief' systems. The person that claimed the world was round refused to accept mainstream opinion. He questioned it and reasoned against it.

Likewise, I reason against your reason. I have no faith in your 'system'. It has failed me and it has failed millions of others. You believe what you choose what you choose to believe and you will ultimately fall with your system. I'll believe what I choose to believe and take my chances.

[Tronlet]

Truth, you appear to be slightly delusional. No one is hiding any of what you've said, don't you think they would have locked this topic by now if any of what you were saying was true?

Topics talking about everything you have brought up are everywhere on the forums, just close your eyes and point.

[truthcracker]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

For some reason, I don't give two shits when someone says they have an economics degree.

Maybe it's because such degrees are frequently held by people like Ben Bernanke.

Would it help if I told you I was a chief then?  Ben Bernake is also a man, do you only take economic arguments from girls?

I suppose I should have been more to the point and said that mentioning your econ degree probably doesn't mean much around here, so I wouldn't lead off with it if I were you.

Don't rely on titles to get respect.  Expect to have to earn respect with your actions around here.  Sounds good, right?

Providing context and an expectation of respect are different.  It enables people to have a rough guide of what knowledge to assume.  Its not a street fight or guns at dawn its useful information.

[truthcracker]

What the hell is a Nebbie?  or a Nebie?

Also, how can anyone possibly look at these forums and pretend that deflation is a big secret that we are trying to hide from the masses?  You can hardly swing a cat in here without hitting a dozen threads on the subject, including the one and only sticky topic in the Economics forum.

Why are people trying to suppress the point that the system is unfairly designed?

 

The facts are plastered all over these forums, as are all of the opinions for and against the system as designed.  I still don't see how you can continue to claim that there is some sort of suppression going on.  You are free to post your opinion that the system is unfair.  Other people are equally free to disagree with your view, and to post their rebuttals.  Is that what you mean by suppression?  Are we suppressing you by posting our disagreements?

Yes I can see that.  i went straight to the economic forum post and the first one was basically everyone shut up about deflation, this is the final word, anyone who asks you about it - just tell them this is your answer.... I started thinking.... why?  I quote the post in my kick off thread.

[malditonuke]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

The reason all the early adopters - read people with a shit load of bit coins, don't want to talk about the fact bitcoins is designed for deflation is because what it really means is this.

Another reason you shouldn't mention that you have an econ degree:

How in the heck can you have an econ degree and at the same time fail to understand the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency?

It's odd to me that someone with an econ degree can have such a lack of education on monetary theory.

[conspirosphere.tk]

Check out a recent interview to Doug Casey (a famous investor /speculator) on Bitcoin:
Doug Casey on Bitcoin and Currencies
http://webabuser.blogspot.com/2011/06/doug-casey-on-bitcoin-and-currencies.html

I tend to agree with him is that the main problem is that Bitcoin is "backed by nothing" but the full faith and credit of adopters.
I would add that millions of bitcoins concentrated in the few hands of founders and early adopters means that these ppl can move the price as they please. That is quite bad.

I see no problem with a deflationary currency: even gold and silver are deflationary, and they worked fine a few thousands of years.

[malditonuke]

I tend to agree with him is that the main problem is that Bitcoin is "backed by nothing" but the full faith and credit of adopters.

I can understand the uneasiness that such a characteristic would impose, but I have not yet heard any solid arguments backing the claim that a currency must be backed by something.  (and for some reason, gold is given a free pass, i.e. can be 'self-backed')

[kjj]

What the hell is a Nebbie?  or a Nebie?

Also, how can anyone possibly look at these forums and pretend that deflation is a big secret that we are trying to hide from the masses?  You can hardly swing a cat in here without hitting a dozen threads on the subject, including the one and only sticky topic in the Economics forum.

Why are people trying to suppress the point that the system is unfairly designed?

 

The facts are plastered all over these forums, as are all of the opinions for and against the system as designed.  I still don't see how you can continue to claim that there is some sort of suppression going on.  You are free to post your opinion that the system is unfair.  Other people are equally free to disagree with your view, and to post their rebuttals.  Is that what you mean by suppression?  Are we suppressing you by posting our disagreements?

Yes I can see that.  i went straight to the economic forum post and the first one was basically everyone shut up about deflation, this is the final word, anyone who asks you about it - just tell them this is your answer.... I started thinking.... why?  I quote the post in my kick off thread.

It is mostly because we are sick of having to read a dozen of these threads every day.  You don't need to trust me when I say that it has all been said here before (and many times).  You can check for yourself.

Personally, I would love to hear a novel argument against the design.  But that never happens.  Instead we get hundreds of people, none of whom ever bother searching or even just clicking on any of the many other topics on the issue, and they always end up posting what amounts to the same three tired arguments over and over again.

#1 - Deflation will benefit other people more than it will benefit me.
#2 - Inflation causes prosperity, deflation causes ruin.
#3 - We will run out of money.

By the way, I have no power or authority on these forums.  When I saw "we", I mean the people that disagree with the deflation = evilz theory, not the board moderators, but considering the sticky, I suspect there is some overlap.

[ribuck]

In other news, early adopters who bought Van Gogh paintings 125 years ago made more money than those who came later. Of course, they also took more risk, because it was less certain that his works would become so desirable.

[conspirosphere.tk]

I have not yet heard any solid arguments backing the claim that a currency must be backed by something.  (and for some reason, gold is given a free pass, i.e. can be 'self-backed')

I know only 2 kinds of currencies: commodity-currencies: backed, or consisting of some commodity (precious or base metal, shells, or whatever commodity),
and debt-based currencies: backed by debt, and therefore some credibility to have debts paid, like courts, police, army, in short the state.

But Bitcoin is clearly none of this. Here comes the problem, until (if) it will become self-backed like gold and silver.  

[malditonuke]

I have not yet heard any solid arguments backing the claim that a currency must be backed by something.  (and for some reason, gold is given a free pass, i.e. can be 'self-backed')

I know only 2 kinds of currencies: commodity-currencies: backed, or consisting of some commodity (precious or base metal, shells, or whatever commodity),
and debt-based currencies: backed by debt, and therefore some credibility to have debts paid, like courts, police, army, in short the state.

But Bitcoin is clearly none of this. Here comes the problem, until (if) it will become self-backed like gold and silver.  

Bitcoin is a service.  It is potentially the world's first service-backed currency.

[truthcracker]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

The reason all the early adopters - read people with a shit load of bit coins, don't want to talk about the fact bitcoins is designed for deflation is because what it really means is this.

Another reason you shouldn't mention that you have an econ degree:

How in the heck can you have an econ degree and at the same time fail to understand the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency?

It's odd to me that someone with an econ degree can have such a lack of education on monetary theory.

The only person demonstrating a lack of understanding is you.  I'm making no statements about the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency.  These threads are clearly not a place to discuss bit coins they appear to be a bunch of insecure people looking to get rich.

I'm going to find a serious forum on bitcoins - does anyone have any suggestions?  Or maybe I'll just go back to the white papers.  You can all just stay here and debate the 'perceived' benefits of ripping people off, the rubbish value of education and how it doesn't matter if something is fair.

What a crowd.

Sorry if I've included some people unfairly in this description.

[kjj]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

The reason all the early adopters - read people with a shit load of bit coins, don't want to talk about the fact bitcoins is designed for deflation is because what it really means is this.

Another reason you shouldn't mention that you have an econ degree:

How in the heck can you have an econ degree and at the same time fail to understand the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency?

It's odd to me that someone with an econ degree can have such a lack of education on monetary theory.

The only person demonstrating a lack of understanding is you.  I'm making no statements about the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency.  These threads are clearly not a place to discuss bit coins they appear to be a bunch of insecure people looking to get rich.

I'm going to find a serious forum on bitcoins - does anyone have any suggestions?  Or maybe I'll just go back to the white papers.  You can all just stay here and debate the 'perceived' benefits of ripping people off, the rubbish value of education and how it doesn't matter if something is fair.

What a crowd.

Sorry if I've included some people unfairly in this description.

Shit, I think I missed something.  Who is getting ripped off?

[truthcracker]

I have not yet heard any solid arguments backing the claim that a currency must be backed by something.  (and for some reason, gold is given a free pass, i.e. can be 'self-backed')

I know only 2 kinds of currencies: commodity-currencies: backed, or consisting of some commodity (precious or base metal, shells, or whatever commodity),
and debt-based currencies: backed by debt, and therefore some credibility to have debts paid, like courts, police, army, in short the state.

But Bitcoin is clearly none of this. Here comes the problem, until (if) it will become self-backed like gold and silver.  

Bitcoin is a service.  It is potentially the world's first service-backed currency.

OK, now someone is making sense.  Yes, I can see it as a service.  But from an economic modelling point of view its strutter is killing it - the service vendors want is price certainty and investors (as opposed to speculators) want a store of value.

The initial flood of bitcoins followed by a contraction and divisibility will lead to an almost central bank like situation where the "reserves" are held disproportionately by a tiny few.  Surely it can be seeded better and then yes, I can see the service built on top of the technology being a winner.

I see bitcoins as a prototype that others (including me) are and will learn from - so I'd say the if you want a quick buck the only guaranteed way would be in the exchanges - they win no matter what and currently people will sign up to 2 guys and a server and throw $100 mill at it!

Remember in the gold rush it was the publicans and the store owners who did very well with very little risk.

I'm sure a virtual currency is here to stay but I'm also fairly sure it won't be bitcoin  - bitcoin is like the bankcard of the virtual currency world.

[malditonuke]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

The reason all the early adopters - read people with a shit load of bit coins, don't want to talk about the fact bitcoins is designed for deflation is because what it really means is this.

Another reason you shouldn't mention that you have an econ degree:

How in the heck can you have an econ degree and at the same time fail to understand the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency?

It's odd to me that someone with an econ degree can have such a lack of education on monetary theory.

The only person demonstrating a lack of understanding is you.  I'm making no statements about the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency.  These threads are clearly not a place to discuss bit coins they appear to be a bunch of insecure people looking to get rich.

I'm going to find a serious forum on bitcoins - does anyone have any suggestions?  Or maybe I'll just go back to the white papers.  You can all just stay here and debate the 'perceived' benefits of ripping people off, the rubbish value of education and how it doesn't matter if something is fair.

What a crowd.

Sorry if I've included some people unfairly in this description.

What you don't seem to understand is that buyers of bitcoins want deflation because they think it is a good thing.  There is no conspiracy.  It is no secret.

You should read up on the perils of inflationism to understand where I am coming from.  Link: http://mises.org/books/Theory_Money_Credit/Part2_Ch13.aspx

[truthcracker]

Does someone have info/stats about bitcoin distribution ?

If somebody is interrested to graph flow and has experience making graphs, please contact me offline...

I only have rumors - there are supposedly 2 500,000 bitcoin stashes and the 'founder' has over a million.  But I haven't been able to confirm that.  I would say the exchange owners may have accumulated a tidy sum as well - but I would like to see the spread also - my understanding is that the block chain acts like a ledger of everything that has happened, and every transaction writes it record in a way that references all others - meaning its hard to fake, I believe if you had more than half the hashing power of the network you could enforce you version of the ledger, and with pools like deepbit having close to half this might be a problem, but generally its an ingenious idea.

My problem comes from an economic analysis going forward and I believe its too late for this service to be restructured, so it will have to rise again in another form.  I think bitcoins will stay around in some form, to service a market, but this is internet beta from an economic modelling perspective.

Here's my prediction - the early adopters will cash out enough before the crash to have the capital to start bitcoins II.

[truthcracker]

I have an Economics Degree From Sydney University

The reason all the early adopters - read people with a shit load of bit coins, don't want to talk about the fact bitcoins is designed for deflation is because what it really means is this.

Another reason you shouldn't mention that you have an econ degree:

How in the heck can you have an econ degree and at the same time fail to understand the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency?

It's odd to me that someone with an econ degree can have such a lack of education on monetary theory.

The only person demonstrating a lack of understanding is you.  I'm making no statements about the perceived benefits of a deflationary currency.  These threads are clearly not a place to discuss bit coins they appear to be a bunch of insecure people looking to get rich.

I'm going to find a serious forum on bitcoins - does anyone have any suggestions?  Or maybe I'll just go back to the white papers.  You can all just stay here and debate the 'perceived' benefits of ripping people off, the rubbish value of education and how it doesn't matter if something is fair.

What a crowd.

Sorry if I've included some people unfairly in this description.

What you don't seem to understand is that buyers of bitcoins want deflation because they think it is a good thing.  There is no conspiracy.  It is no secret.

You should read up on the perils of inflationism to understand where I am coming from.  Link: http://mises.org/books/Theory_Money_Credit/Part2_Ch13.aspx

Dude I studied for four years and run a youtube channel about the coming risk of hyperinflation - I belong to the austrian school of economics, follow the mises institute, Marc Faber, Jim Rodgers, Peter Schiff for the popular treatments.  For 30 years America had deflation and it was great!  Inflation is the way the Anglo American Cartel steals from the entire world.  I get it.  What you don't get is that THIS particular system is going to fail not because of deflation per se, but because the early adopters have used the deflation argument not to better everybody, but to enrich themselves.  It has encouraged ridiculous speculation that is harmful and driven vendors away.  The only cash in the system comes from speculators, and 5% vendors.  Its going to crash back to nothing - as soon as a vendor friendly bitcoin II comes along everyone will leave bitcoins for bitcoins II.

And the funny thing is bitcoins II will probably be funded by the early adopters who have some of the speculators cash to create a better system.  Bitcoin is a beta.