Bitcoin: SDR for the little guy.

[Synaptic]

One of the arguments for Bitcoin is as an alternative reserve currency. In fact for many people it is THE primary argument for the worth of Bitcoin.

"A distributed peer to peer currency."

However, there is already an almost perfect analog of this in the real world, by people who actually matter in finance, on a scale that actually means something. It's the SDR, or Special Drawing Rights of the IMF.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Drawing_Rights

It's Bitcoin for sovereign nations, and it was neither very effective or widely used.

[1713576508]

1713576508

[1713576508]

1713576508

[BitcoinPorn]

I used to be on their forums, some lame phBB set up, they need to up their PR and I think it might work out for them.

[DamienBlack]

It's Bitcoin for sovereign nations, and it was neither very effective or widely used.

I hope you aren't trying to make a comparison. As that would be silly.

[caston]

You could also say SDR = Service Debt Repayments

It's usury and with it comes shackles and chains.

[billyjoeallen]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

[Synaptic]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

[DamienBlack]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

No, there is a huge different. If I have 10 bitcoins, and they get decimated x10, I now have a full 100 bitcoins each worth only 10% of the original. If I have 10 bitcoins and the total number of bitcoins is increased 10 fold (inflation), I still only have 10 bitcoins, but each is worth only 10% of the original. Big, big difference.

You get a fair share during decimating. You get diluted during inflation.

[billyjoeallen]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

Repeating a claim is not a sufficient substitute for a valid argument. I'm not even sure you know what "decimating" means.

[w1R903]

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

This word, "inflation"...I do-not-ah-think it means what you think it means.

[Synaptic]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

Repeating a claim is not a sufficient substitute for a valid argument. I'm not even sure you know what "decimating" means.

If my usage of "decimate" leads you to question my knowledge of its meaning I am absolutely certain you have no idea what it means.

[asdf]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

Repeating a claim is not a sufficient substitute for a valid argument. I'm not even sure you know what "decimating" means.

If my usage of "decimate" leads you to question my knowledge of its meaning I am absolutely certain you have no idea what it means.

Still, you choose to answer to this rather than the previous posts which countered your argument. Although, you never actually made an argument.

Why don't you tell us what decimating means, in your definition, so that we can be clear about your claim. It sounds to me like you're saying that if we move the decimal place one to the right, this is exactly the same as issuing 9*21million new bitcoins. Is this an accurate account of your meaning?

[billyjoeallen]

1. It's still being used
2. It can be diluted. Bitcoin can't.

1. It's hardly being used, and rather insignificantly at that.
2. Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation or "dilution."

Let me repeat that because it bears reiteration:

Decimating Bitcoin is no different than inflation.

Repeating a claim is not a sufficient substitute for a valid argument. I'm not even sure you know what "decimating" means.

If my usage of "decimate" leads you to question my knowledge of its meaning I am absolutely certain you have no idea what it means.

dec·i·mate/ˈdesəˌmāt/Verb
1. Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of.
2. Drastically reduce the strength or effectiveness of (something): "plant viruses that can decimate yields".

or this from Wikipedia:
Decimation (Latin: decimatio; decem = "ten") was a form of military discipline used by officers in the Roman Army to punish mutinous or cowardly soldiers. The word decimation is derived from Latin meaning "removal of a tenth."

Now, you could mean "a technique for reducing the number of samples in a discrete-time signal. " (also from wikipedia, but that would make even less sense.

If you destroy bitcoins, the rest become more valuable because of the law or supply and demand.

If you imply that somehow we can move the decimal. effectively increasing the number of Bitcoins by ten, then you are simply pissing into the wind. not. gonna. happen.  Can't happen in fact without the consensus of the very people who would stand to lose the most if it happened.

[DamienBlack]

Don't pick on his word usage. We know what he meant. He is just waiting to start up a different straw-man argument, don't feed him. He meant something like decimalize or decimalisation.

[Synaptic]

Very briefly,

decem- : by ten

-ate : to do, to make, to cause, or to act upon; to do something with


I understand language. I don't go by the definition you just found at Google.

[DamienBlack]

Very briefly,

decem- : by ten

-ate : to do, to make, to cause, or to act upon; to do something with


I understand language. I don't go by the definition you just found at Google.

Told you. Now he is hoping someone jumps on the "you don't use language the way it is defined?" argument, because that could go on forever and he'll get a kick out of it the whole way.

[Synaptic]

Very briefly,

decem- : by ten

-ate : to do, to make, to cause, or to act upon; to do something with


I understand language. I don't go by the definition you just found at Google.

Told you. Now he is hoping someone jumps on the "you don't use language the way it is defined?" argument, because that could go on forever and he'll get a kick out of it the whole way.

Actually I caren't.  I've simply shown that people who rely on pithy internet searches to do all of their reasoning for them are inferior to people who reason based on fundamental understanding. That is the end of this particular argument.

Now as for Bitcoin being the poor man's SDR, my assessment still stands.

[DamienBlack]

Now as for Bitcoin being the poor man's SDR, my assessment still stands.

Really? That is news to me. But I guess I'll take your work on it.

[Synaptic]

Now as for Bitcoin being the poor man's SDR, my assessment still stands.

Really? That is news to me. But I guess I'll take your work on it.

Read about it. Post your arguments how it's different.

Essentially, Bitcoin acts just as SDR does between currencies, just on a mundane scale.

[billyjoeallen]

Very briefly,

decem- : by ten

-ate : to do, to make, to cause, or to act upon; to do something with


I understand language. I don't go by the definition you just found at Google.

Told you. Now he is hoping someone jumps on the "you don't use language the way it is defined?" argument, because that could go on forever and he'll get a kick out of it the whole way.

Actually I caren't.  I've simply shown that people who rely on pithy internet searches to do all of their reasoning for them are inferior to people who reason based on fundamental understanding. That is the end of this particular argument.

Now as for Bitcoin being the poor man's SDR, my assessment still stands.

This is getting amusing. Pithy is actually a compliment. You would have gotten more mileage out of the word "pedantic".  You assessment never stood in the first place. Nobody who has the power to move the decimal has any incentive to actually do so.

[Synaptic]

Very briefly,

decem- : by ten

-ate : to do, to make, to cause, or to act upon; to do something with


I understand language. I don't go by the definition you just found at Google.

Told you. Now he is hoping someone jumps on the "you don't use language the way it is defined?" argument, because that could go on forever and he'll get a kick out of it the whole way.

Actually I caren't.  I've simply shown that people who rely on pithy internet searches to do all of their reasoning for them are inferior to people who reason based on fundamental understanding. That is the end of this particular argument.

Now as for Bitcoin being the poor man's SDR, my assessment still stands.

This is getting amusing. Pithy is actually a compliment. You would have gotten more mileage out of the word "pedantic".  You assessment never stood in the first place. Nobody who has the power to move the decimal has any incentive to actually do so.

Except it was sarcasm...

/s/pithy/s/ internet searches.

now quit being a pithant and post something relevant.