Bitcoin Mention in CNN

[error]

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Don't be so sure of that. It was likely a half hour interview and they only used a few seconds of it.

[1714020957]

1714020957

[swusc2]

Another biased report; mentions of the word "Ponzi scheme", "illegal activities" and etc without explaining such arguments ("some say...").

Maybe we should all stop using cash? Since cash is probably the most popular method of illegal transactions, ie drug dealing.

The aim of a currency has nothing to with stopping it from being used for illegal or shameful purposes. As long as people want drugs or porn or whatever else, they will find ways to use any currency as a trading tool, be it cash or Bitcoins or golden nuggets. It's not Bitcoins' problem, it's an issue with people.

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Apparently people can't say "Some people say bad things about it."

Some people say you are an idiot.

[noedaRDH]

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Don't be so sure of that. It was likely a half hour interview and they only used a few seconds of it.

Okay, I apologize. Let me restate that the problem is with the reporting, not the guy from WIRED.

[hawks5999]

I wouldn't trust CNN. They are beholden to the existing system of Big Business, Big Banks, etc.

Notice the Bitcoin "taking off like a rocket" at the beginning, implying hyperinflation or too many coins in circulation.

Ummm... that's from the opening of Bruce's "The BitCoin Show".

He will be able to get any chick he wants (if he's into that kinda thing). 

and Bruce has been out on "The BitCoin Show" since at least the MtGox crash.

Maybe Bruce needs to advertise "The BitCoin Show" more.

[hawks5999]

This is great news you guys! The reporting was really fair, and and genuine. Great job CNN.

I agree. Of course this will really be awesome when it isn't in the "Tech Talk" section and it's not on CNNMoney.

When a story like this leads in the hour on plain old vanilla CNN, then we will know it's mainstream.

[noedaRDH]

Another biased report; mentions of the word "Ponzi scheme", "illegal activities" and etc without explaining such arguments ("some say...").

Maybe we should all stop using cash? Since cash is probably the most popular method of illegal transactions, ie drug dealing.

The aim of a currency has nothing to with stopping it from being used for illegal or shameful purposes. As long as people want drugs or porn or whatever else, they will find ways to use any currency as a trading tool, be it cash or Bitcoins or golden nuggets. It's not Bitcoins' problem, it's an issue with people.

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Apparently people can't say "Some people say bad things about it."

Some people say you are an idiot.

And who are those "some people"? What do they base their arguments on?

No need for personal attacks.

[BillX]

Another biased report; mentions of the word "Ponzi scheme", "illegal activities" and etc without explaining such arguments ("some say...").

Maybe we should all stop using cash? Since cash is probably the most popular method of illegal transactions, ie drug dealing.

The aim of a currency has nothing to with stopping it from being used for illegal or shameful purposes. As long as people want drugs or porn or whatever else, they will find ways to use any currency as a trading tool, be it cash or Bitcoins or golden nuggets. It's not Bitcoins' problem, it's an issue with people.

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Apparently people can't say "Some people say bad things about it."

Some people say you are an idiot.

And who are those "some people"? What do they base their arguments on?

No need for personal attacks.

I think what he is trying to say is that CNN is going to put a fluff piece about bitcoin on the air. People have different views and CNN is going to bring those different views on the air.

[swusc2]

Another biased report; mentions of the word "Ponzi scheme", "illegal activities" and etc without explaining such arguments ("some say...").

Maybe we should all stop using cash? Since cash is probably the most popular method of illegal transactions, ie drug dealing.

The aim of a currency has nothing to with stopping it from being used for illegal or shameful purposes. As long as people want drugs or porn or whatever else, they will find ways to use any currency as a trading tool, be it cash or Bitcoins or golden nuggets. It's not Bitcoins' problem, it's an issue with people.

For every hint of a "pro" Bitcoin argument, they present a dozen useless negative fallacies about Bitcoin. Why don't they mention how Bitcoin cannot be willingly printed at mass out of thin air? The guy from WIRED didn't mention any of the security aspects of Bitcoins and how it cannot be easily counterfeited.

Apparently people can't say "Some people say bad things about it."

Some people say you are an idiot.

And who are those "some people"? What do they base their arguments on?

No need for personal attacks.

People on this forum, experts, whoever wants to say it is.

a) It can be used for illegal activies. We all know it can. Any currency can. People know USD can.

b) Money inherently is a Ponzi scheme whether it be Fiat(USD) or pseudo-fiat(Bitcoin). They all derive their value from the # of people willing to use and accept it whether as currency or just a method of wealth storage.

Some say Mac is safer than Windows some say the opposite. Both sides cite some evidence. Am I not allowed to say "Some say Windows is safer than Mac and some say it isn't" or is that too bias?

[Vod]

b) Money inherently is a Ponzi scheme whether it be Fiat(USD) or pseudo-fiat(Bitcoin). They all derive their value from the # of people willing to use and accept it whether as currency or just a method of wealth storage.

That is not even close to the definition of a Ponzi.  A simple definition would be using today's money to pay yesterday's bills.  Bitcoin is not a Ponzi, although money (USD) is.

[swusc2]

b) Money inherently is a Ponzi scheme whether it be Fiat(USD) or pseudo-fiat(Bitcoin). They all derive their value from the # of people willing to use and accept it whether as currency or just a method of wealth storage.

That is not even close to the definition of a Ponzi.  A simple definition would be using today's money to pay yesterday's bills.  Bitcoin is not a Ponzi, although money (USD) is.

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors."

Other than the word fraudulent, I stand corrected.

All forms of money are Pyramid based, the value increases as per more investors. If there are less investors the value decreases, the people who most recently invested in it lose money. Whether or not is a "scheme" is a another story.


TO BE CLEAR:
I'm not saying Pyramid based currency is a bad thing. All of them are, some people just associate the Pyramid/Ponzi idea as negative and don't understand what they really mean. The only difference between Bitcoin and a Ponzi Scheme, is intent.

[BillX]

Some say Mac is safer than Windows some say the opposite. Both sides cite some evidence. Am I not allowed to say "Some say Windows is safer than Mac and some say it isn't" or is that too bias?

How dare you mention even the possibility of something Apple is not perfect in every way!!! You are most definitely biased sir!!!   

[Vod]

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors."

"Subsequent" is the key word.  Once you stop getting new investors, a Ponzi scheme will collapse, even if every single person in the world has taken part.

Bitcoin is not like that.  Once it matures and finds its place, it will not need any new influx of coins or users to keep it running or keep it valued.

[swusc2]

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors."

"Subsequent" is the key word.  Once you stop getting new investors, a Ponzi scheme will collapse, even if every single person in the world has taken part.

Bitcoin is not like that.  Once it matures and finds its place, it will not need any new influx of coins or users to keep it running or keep it valued.

Incorrect. A Ponzi scheme does not necessarily collapse without new investors. The value of the investment in a Ponzi scheme does not change as long as the people at the top are not siphoning off value.

[Smalleyster]

Seemed relatively "fair and balanced" to me.

[elk-tamer]

Their animated explanation was great. I'm going to use it next time I have to explain the concept to someone.

[enmaku]

Their animated explanation was great. I'm going to use it next time I have to explain the concept to someone.

... it's the "what is bitcoin" video from http://www.weusecoins.com/

[Jered Kenna (TradeHill)]

First NPR, now CNN. For some reason, it seems the more exposed we are, the lower price we are headed to

Exposure was bigger in May and June than this month.

In fact, there is a good correlation between Bitcoin popularity and price, as evidenced by google trends and alexa rankings.

Hi ForeverD,

Yeah, the G-trends correlation was really tight.

There has been a slew of papers in the last year showing how Google trends data can be used to anticipate stocks moves. Some researchers from the Central Bank of Chile wrote a paper showing these methods even work in emerging markets where internet saturation is still low.

What have you found?

Thanks,
Adam - Tradehill

[MrJoshua]

b) Money inherently is a Ponzi scheme whether it be Fiat(USD) or pseudo-fiat(Bitcoin). They all derive their value from the # of people willing to use and accept it whether as currency or just a method of wealth storage.

That is not even close to the definition of a Ponzi.  A simple definition would be using today's money to pay yesterday's bills.  Bitcoin is not a Ponzi, although money (USD) is.

"A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors."

Other than the word fraudulent, I stand corrected.

All forms of money are Pyramid based, the value increases as per more investors. If there are less investors the value decreases, the people who most recently invested in it lose money. Whether or not is a "scheme" is a another story.


TO BE CLEAR:
I'm not saying Pyramid based currency is a bad thing. All of them are, some people just associate the Pyramid/Ponzi idea as negative and don't understand what they really mean. The only difference between Bitcoin and a Ponzi Scheme, is intent.

Not to derail the thread but you're missing a key feature that distinguishes ponzi schemes from legitimate investments, and bitcoins.  It is more then just intent.

In legitimate investments you are buying a percentage of something.  If you hold 1% of Apple, it will always be 1% of apple, even if they issue more stock, or split the stock that is already issued.  This is not true of ponzi schemes in which the scheme continues to sell shares, the shares have no relationship to a percentage of ownership (even of the scheme itself).  With bitcoins what you hold is a fixed percentage of the 21 million bitcoins that will exist.  Just like owning stock in a company.  What you own will _always_ represent the same percentage, distinctly unlike ponzi schemes, and fiat currencies.

I really want people to understand this point, so that we can kill this ponzi argument once and for all.

[Bitcoin Swami]

So it was on tv apparently.  The intro was full of wrong infromation but oh well.  Here is teh intro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OcTFOQpz0c

[CurbsideProphet]

In legitimate investments you are buying a percentage of something.  If you hold 1% of Apple, it will always be 1% of apple, even if they issue more stock, or split the stock that is already issued.  This is not true of ponzi schemes in which the scheme continues to sell shares, the shares have no relationship to a percentage of ownership (even of the scheme itself).  With bitcoins what you hold is a fixed percentage of the 21 million bitcoins that will exist.  Just like owning stock in a company.  What you own will _always_ represent the same percentage, distinctly unlike ponzi schemes, and fiat currencies.

I really want people to understand this point, so that we can kill this ponzi argument once and for all.

Your ownership percentage in a company can absolutely go down.  It's called stock dilution.