Bitcoin Forum
May 02, 2024, 04:59:24 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Is Bitcoin a Pyramid or Ponzi scheme & what are the ramifications?
yes - 9 (13.2%)
no - 59 (86.8%)
Total Voters: 68

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Bitcoin a Pyramid or Ponzi scheme & what are the ramifications?  (Read 16866 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:10:54 PM
 #101

So my little economic knowledge makes me think you confuse an over over valuation ( bubble ) with pyramid scheme one is a scam from the beggining ( operators according to sec ) the other is a bunch of fool fooling themself and other but at least didn t start as a scam.
Is bitcoin in the later stage? That may be hard to tell ofc ...

If it quacks, smells, and tastes like a systemic catastrophe mania, then it probably is.

Do we need to invent new names for fraudulent pump & dumpers who egg us into systemic catastrophe?

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
Even if you use Bitcoin through Tor, the way transactions are handled by the network makes anonymity difficult to achieve. Do not expect your transactions to be anonymous unless you really know what you're doing.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
1714625964
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714625964

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714625964
Reply with quote  #2

1714625964
Report to moderator
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:28:12 PM
Last edit: November 21, 2013, 07:38:57 PM by AnonyMint
 #102

All posts that are not on topic and of high quality debate will be deleted. This is a self-moderated thread.

I also deleted numerous of my posts that were tangential to the objective debate.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:45:19 PM
 #103

Lets do a little simple math as follows.

Joe invests $100 to buy all the BTC from Satoshi on day 1, all of BTC is worth $100
Sally invests $1000 to buy 10% of BTC from Joe, all of BTC is worth $10,000
Stop right there.
On what basis is all of BTC worth $10,000? None. Joe is just deluding himself.

Thanks for agreeing with me. That is precisely my point too.

The spot price deludes him into thinking his stash is worth more than it is. Thus this is not 100% transparent. Can't be.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:49:10 PM
 #104

Quote
12. Bitcoin exchanges lie about your balance. They seem to imply that you can sell for a certain price, but the float is only about 0.1% of the market cap, meaning only about 0.1% of the money in Bitcoin can get out any where near the current price. Slam dunk!

That proves this is not a currency and it is no where nearly similar to a bank account!

You can't argue that is okay for stocks so it should be okay for a currency, because as I explained in #4, stocks have an intrinsic value. Bitcoin has no intrinsic value because it is not a currency. Yet if it were a currency, then exchanges wouldn't lie about your account balance. It can't be both ways. If 90+% of Bitcoin wasn't concentrated in a few hands, then the exchange markets would have orders-of-magnitude higher float and liquidity, and thus it could be both a currency and an investment. I suggest a fix in the OP.

It is really simple: your MtGox account IS NOT A BANK ACCOUNT.

Yup. Thanks for agreeing with me.

And most to the point, what makes those $ for € or for £ be a "currency" has NOTHING to do with the fact that they can be exchanged one for another. It has to do with the fact that you can buy goods in return for them.

Yup. Thanks for agreeing with me.

Same way I can buy a humblebundle in BTC, which is what makes BTC a currency.

No you can not buy ALL goods with them, only a very few niche things.

Surely you see now why you did not understand.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:55:02 PM
 #105

Lets do a little simple math as follows.

Joe invests $100 to buy all the BTC from Satoshi on day 1, all of BTC is worth $100
Sally invests $1000 to buy 10% of BTC from Joe, all of BTC is worth $10,000
Joe wants to withdraw his $9000, but there is only $1100 invested in BTC.

I'm not sure you quite understand investments. There is not $1100 invested in BTC in this scenario, there is only BTC invested in BTC. As soon as Joe pays Satoshi $100 for some BTC all that happens is Satoshi has $100. That money no longer has anything to do with bitcoin. And neither does Sally's.

If I'm trying to raise capital and issue new shares which can be bought directly from me to be used for whatever purpose I'm raising capital from, then and only then can you really say the amount paid is "invested in" something.

Correct Satoshi has the $100 and Joe has the $1000. The early adopters have walked away with the cash just as in a Ponzi scheme.

And that has caused the spot price to be $1000 / 10% of BTC. So Joe values his remaining stash at $9000 and Sally hers at $1000. But neither of them can get the $10,000 until a greater fool later investor comes in to buy from them.

The key here is that there is no intrinsic value as a currency even though Bitcoin is pitched as being one.

Joe can't go spend his $9000 to invest in the NYSE. He has to convert to fiat first and he can't if a later greater fool doesn't come give it to him.

This is so elemental and obviously a scam.


unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 07:59:00 PM
 #106

All your arguments, AnonyMint, seem to be based on your own assumption, that "Bitcoin can not be a currency".

I want you to to back this up with some evidence.

This has been explained ad nausea. Read the thread! Don't expect me to write it again. Go read mofo.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 21, 2013, 08:01:01 PM
 #107

Well boys you've pushed it down to 11%,

11% of 7 billion = 770 million people.

That is still about 750 million more than I need. So just keep voting on the socialist choice. It thrills me to no end.

Dodgers there was one more motivation. I wanted to see if I could learn anything or be rebuked. I did learn several new things in this thread.

Probably also subconsciously to demonstrate I am the alpha/sigma-male here amongst mostly betas, and I suspect Impaler is a sigma.  Embarrassed

Back up to 13%. Looks like we ended on a positive trajectory.

There are no new arguments, just people wanting to spam the thread.

The End.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 22, 2013, 03:06:06 AM
 #108

I freaking hate the term "instrinsic value". No such thing.

Your penis has an intrinsic value, i.e. it can generate offspring.

Tangible things always have some intrinsic value, even if just as landfill.

Intangible things only have intrinsic value if the shared idea is factually true (e.g. whether Bitcoin is a currency) or if (e.g. religion) the shared idea can never be falsified.

There may be some gray areas between the definition of a Network and a Ponzi-scheme but I believe Bitcoin is a protocol so calling Bitcoin a Ponzi-scheme is a point I quickly move past.

What you believe is much less relevant than what ends up being in reality. I bet Charles Ponzi feigned innocence through certain beliefs. I rebutted Risto. If anyone feels they have a useful argument to make, PM me and I will unlock the linked thread. I locked it because of the useless, noisy "you are just sore because you didn't buy Bitcoin" butt hurt spam (hilarious butt hurt form). Cheers.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 22, 2013, 04:32:41 AM
 #109

From email someone wrote to me:

> > A few hours ago I made the comment that BitCoin = Amway for delusional
> > Libertarian wannabes.  I couldn't help myself.  Wink Yesterday I said
> > something about the fiat pope (Bernanke) giving BitCoin his blessings -
> > the global mafia often reminds me of The Godfather.
> > Today a video began circulating of an interview with Max Keiser who
> > apparently said BitCoin is beautiful!  The mania is almost on par with the
> > religious fervor of a Pentecostal.  Will Keiser go into a trance next time
> > and speak in tongues?  lol

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 22, 2013, 04:35:16 AM
 #110

On the utility of "transparency" bullshit and TBTF systemic risk Armageddon it creates:

As with the Fed injecting unlimited money. They can, it's legal. There is nothing wrong with it, in fact it is designed to create opportunities for investors. Everyone knows what the Fed is doing, so there is no concern and you can make money too. Furthermore, a currency war has allowed it to become cheaper to manufacture in the United States rather than China..

http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/the-hk-aussies-outsourcing-to-the-usa-20131121-2xwvo.html

Looks like the United States will be able to repay their debt afterall and taper. Basically, that's evidence that it's working.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 22, 2013, 05:43:08 AM
 #111

This thread has been published as an article at The Atlantic mainstream media publication.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/bitcoin-is-the-segway-of-currency/281625/

Bitcoin Is the Segway of Currency

Silicon Valley thinks it's the future, but Bitcoin is more ridiculous than motorized scooters for adults.

MATTHEW O'BRIENNOV 21 2013, 1:02 PM ET

Can we get these half off if we pay with bitcoins? (Reuters)
We were promised jetpacks. We got Segways instead.

Well, we didn't get Segways. Nobody did. At least nobody other than mall cops, tour groups, and techies. Okay, and ironic polo players. But in any case, it's fair to say that Segway hasn't exactly been "to the car what the car was to the horse and buggy," like its founder Dean Kamen said it would. It hasn't even been to the moped what the moped was to the horse and buggy. Or what the bicycle was. It's just been a (sometimes morbid) punchline. And one that's almost too impossible to believe. Did you know that Kamen thought he'd need an around-the-clock factory churning out 10,000 Segways a week to meet initial demand? It's true. It's also true that he only needed to make 10 a week to do so.

This wasn't just self-delusion. It was mass delusion. Back in 2001, Steve Jobs thought Segway could be as big as personal computers. The venture capitalist behind Amazon thought it could be bigger than the internet. The entire internet. The only reasonable explanation for all this hype was that neither of them had actually seen someone ride a Segway. Because, as Y Combinator's Paul Graham puts it, you can't ride a Segway without looking like a "smug dork." And people generally try to avoid looking like that. They won't use something so inherently ridiculous, no matter how technically impressive it might be.

Like Bitcoin.

Now, for those of you who aren't techno-libertarians, Bitcoin is supposed to be a virtual currency you can use to buy things online. Except it's not really a currency, and you can't really buy that much with it. It's more like a dotcom stock—circa 1999. See, in just the last month, one bitcoin has gone from closing at a then-record $192 to reaching $788 on Monday. It then opened at $502 on Tuesday, before briefly rocketing up to $900, and ultimately falling to $646. Just your average 80 percent price swing. That's totally normal for currencies ... if you multiply their biggest swings by 80.

You can kind of see these absurd price moves in the chart below. But only kind of, because the vertical up-and-downs have come so fast that they've blurred into each other. It's almost as if Bitcoin doesn't have a single price at any one time, but rather a range of possible prices that depend on the observer. (Note: the red dots show each day's closing price, and the black lines show each day's high and low).

We can see this a little better if we zoom in on just the last two months. Bitcoin prices were pretty flat from the end of September through early October, but then (relatively at least) doubled slowly. Then they doubled quickly. And then even quicker—before falling fast. Not exactly a stable store of value.



So why has Bitcoin gone parabolic? And what does this have to do with Segway? Well, the short answer is we don't know why the virtual currency has exploded. Part of it might be demand from China (which you can see in this realtime chart of who's buying Bitcoins). Part of it might be the reduced supply after the FBI shut down and seized the drug website Silk Road's substantial Bitcoin holdings. And part of it might be pure mania. But all of these are just another way of saying that Bitcoin's design makes it prone to these boom-bust cycles.

Segway certainly knows something about design problems. Though in its case, its product worked fine, if zipping around on a glorified scooter was your kind of thing. The problem was you couldn't use the product without looking insufferably pretentious. Bitcoin, though, has deeper problems. Its product doesn't work, and its early adopters are still incredibly self-satisfied—because it's making them rich. But the product really doesn't work.

See, the idea behind Bitcoin is to create a decentralized currency that central banks can't inflate and governments can't tax. Basically, digital gold. And like actual gold, the only way to get new bitcoins is to "mine" for them. That involves running a computationally-taxing program on your computer that mostly generates gibberish, but maybe, just maybe, some bitcoins too. The key, though, is that mining for more of the virtual currency doesn't create more of it. That's because there's a predetermined number of bitcoins. Specifically, there are around 12 million today, and there will be 21 million in 2040—and no more after that. Of course, this limited supply means Bitcoin should tend to increase in value against the dollar. But only tend to. See, its deflationary bias means Bitcoin prices will go up and down quite violently. Think about it this way. The supply of bitcoins can't increase much to meet increased demand, so increased demand will make prices soar. And soaring prices will make early adopters try to cash out their winnings—which will send prices crashing back down.

In other words, Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme libertarians use to make money off each other—because gold wasn't enough of one for them.

Bigger Than PCs and the Internet Combined?

But techies say so what. That this misses the point. That what's revolutionary about Bitcoin isn't that it's a currency with no state-backing. What's revolutionary is that it's a payments system with no third-party, like a credit card company, standing in between buyers and sellers. See, any time you buy something, it's a minor leap of faith. You choose to believe that the seller will deliver as promised—and if they don't, you want your money back. That's where financial intermediaries like credit card companies and Paypal come in. They make sure buyers and sellers are both trustworthy, and handle any disputes.

Now, it's nice to be able to get your money back if things go wrong, but that's not free. The middlemen take their cut. Bitcoin, though, has no middlemen. It's just a decentralized peer-to-peer system. So you can't get your bitcoins back if things go wrong, but there won't be any transaction fees. The question is whether non-enthusiasts will think this trade-off is worth it.

Actually, the question is whether anyone will actually use bitcoins to buy things at all. It's not clear why they would when its value can go from $500 to $900 in a matter of hours. Nor when so many people treat it as an inflation hedge. They think of Bitcoin more as an investment than as money. Indeed, researchers from the University of California-San Diego and George Mason University found that 64 percent of all bitcoins are being hoarded in accounts that have never been spent. And of the bitcoins that are being spent, a full 60 percent are on the gambling site Satoshi Dice.

There are companies trying to expand Bitcoin beyond its core constituencies of libertarians, gamblers, and people buying drugs. The startup Bitpay, for one, lets merchants immediately convert any bitcoin payments into dollars. The idea is it can charge lower fees without making companies take on the risk that Bitcoin's value falls. It's a clever idea that should make merchants more willing to accept bitcoins ... but won't make people more willing to use them. The people who have bitcoins still have no reason to spend them, and the people who don't still have no reason to get them. They don't want a currency whose value you can't predict from one hour to the next. They don't want to buy things anonymously. And they don't want transactions to be irreversible (and certainly wouldn't want that if they got hacked).

Every big idea starts out sounding crazy. But not every crazy-sounding idea ends up being big. History is littered with Segways. But for all its majestic dweebiness, at least the Segway was kind of useful. You really could zoom across sidewalks without anything resembling effort. I don't know why you'd want to, but you could. But what can you do with Bitcoin? Well, it's good for real and fake gambling. Since it doesn't have any actual fundamentals, it can be worth anything: Bitcoin 36,000 and 36 are about equally plausible. That's good for making money at the expense of people who get in the game later, but little else.

So the biggest difference between Segway and Bitcoin might be that even mall cops won't use Bitcoin.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 22, 2013, 06:05:23 AM
 #112

Where I disagree with AnonyMint's arguments is the consequences of these facts. AnonyMint envisions a future where all the world's wealth gets sucked up into bitcoin leading to a massive horrendous crash. This is not likely to happen.

Instead I believe the Bitcoin bubble is completely necessary. As was mentioned earlier in the thread a true stable and successful world wide cryptocurrency needs to be widely distributed and dispersed and widely mined ideally by CPU mining. The only way to accomplish that is to role out such a currency to a world population that is largely primed and excited to receive it.

The role of Bitcoin is to prime the world for its successor. 

Actually you and I entirely agree. Very astute. I was actually pitching that outcome but it may be difficult to discern among the constant defense of the prior points. I stated two possible outcomes.

1. Bitcoin goes to $trillions market cap and we have systemic default problem on our hands.

2. Altcoins or other factor halts the ascent before that happens.

However, #2 forks into basically two possibilities and one of them is very scary IMO:

2a. Altcoin(s) and decentralized competition.

2b. Government supply electronic fiat currency.

I've known for a long-time what the government's strategy was, and now they are starting to reveal it:

You parrot Paul Krugman's nonsense. The QE ended up as dollar bond issues in the developing world, because of the carry trade on ZIRP ostensibly through the primary dealers and other arbitrages.

So in 2015 you will hear a giant sucking sound from BRICs et al into the dollar as these loans have to be serviced into a collapsing global trade given ECB just started NIRP (negative interest rate policy).

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/negative-interest-rates-coming-soon-to-a-bank-near-you/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/17/negative-interest-rates-eliminating-cash-the-summers-solution/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/18/15800/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/21/will-electronic-money-be-deflationary/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/20/the-tree-has-been-cut-electronic-money-will-force-an-underground-economy-based-on-barter/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/20/the-bitcoin-hearing/

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/11/19/congressional-hearings-on-bitcoin/

They can accomplish it with the market failure of Bitcoin.

They have two main vectors of takeover:

1. Regulate the people and business who use Bitcoin, since it is not anonymous.

2. Technical takeover employing Amazon et al.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 23, 2013, 06:00:42 AM
Last edit: November 23, 2013, 06:19:18 AM by AnonyMint
 #113

Link to the other parallel thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=342007.msg3682757#msg3682757

I can speculate on whether Branson as a member of the elite (Bilderberger, CFR member, etc) is playing ball as he has been perhaps told to. Or perhaps he really believes in Bitcoin. But he isn't here in these forums down in the trenches. And he doesn't see what I see technically.

So let him end up as another Bitcoin idiot. Fine with me. I'd love to slay his ass if he puts his net worth in Bitcoin. But of course he isn't that stupid and so isn't endorsing it for himself, rather encouraging the greater fools who I am about to teach a lesson in market dynamics.

The thread was closed because all the key arguments had been made and argued. I am one man against 100+ butt hurt Bitcoin zealots who are unable to read the thread before they post and were posting either redundant arguments or spamming the thread with "you are wrong, because you are wrong" 0-information non-arguments.

I will go post a link from that thread to this one, so all your posts are acknowledged.

Ain't No Future In Yo Frontin, "Shine it up good".

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
November 27, 2013, 08:19:18 AM
 #114

Henry Blodget weighs on the bubble.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/bitcoin-heading-toward-high-could-1-million-175818638.html

Peter Schiff conveys many of the same points:


Everyone should listen to this!

Peter Schiff's repeats most all of my points, but he says a gold-backed private bank issued digital currency would be superior. Schiff misses the point that such a private bank issued digital currency isn't decentralized, and thus it is highly vulnerable to government control. Other than that, Schiff and I agree on most of his points, including the coming political threat:

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/11/social-logins-for-government-services.html

Schiff's main flaw is he thinks a backed-currency is better. If I debated him, I would demolish his logic on this point. You can see my upthread comments (I think starting on page 11) on why fractional reserves and gold-backed private bank issued notes was a failure. The intrinsic value of a decentralized currency is that it is a currency (unfortunately Bitcoin isn't). 100% pure physical gold has never been a currency and never will be-- was always either debased by shaving, impurity, or fractional reserves in order to distribute widely as a currency. Refer to my debate with MoonShadow before page 11.

We already demolished the "it is a standard" argument.

Schiff is correct that it is much easier for the government to track on the internet, and anonymity is very, very difficult (link is to James Donaldson's blog who was the very first person to interact with Satoshi in a public forum). That doesn't mean anonymity is impossible. But for example CoinJoin or coin mixers really won't work unless the other people you are mixing with never reveal their identity accidentally any time in the distant future.

It is true that all of us want a better option than fiat currency. We just don't have it yet.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
December 01, 2013, 01:16:33 AM
 #115

Gary North who is allied with Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, the Mises Institute, and Austrian economics, says Bitcoins: The Second Biggest Ponzi Scheme in History.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
December 02, 2013, 05:22:47 PM
Last edit: December 03, 2013, 07:30:58 PM by AnonyMint
 #116

Add Alex Jones to the growing lists of prominent Libertarians that say Bitcoin is a ponzi-bubble.

In a new Video Alex jones stated that he believes crypto currency is the way of the future, however Bitcoin specifically is a creation of the NWO global elites due to its shadowy origins and is just a bubble that will ultimately fail. He also advises against investing in it.

It's unfortunate in my opinion that he decided to take this stance on Bitcoins, as he's one of the most popular Libertarians out there with 10's of Millions worldwide followers which could've helped Bitcoin in terms of promotion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCgkCBvODl8

Alex is often over dramatic and sensationalizes everything, as well he is often too loose on the facts.

Nevertheless, he is very much correct in what he said in this video, in terms of the USA being dumbed down (ah I see my ACT and SAT qualified me for Mensa) with low IQ races, violent races, eugenics, and feminism then mind programmed (by TV, propaganda, constant video stimulation, and Stupid U state schools) into zombie society of feminine "males" and asexual females. Note the aforementioned links are James A. Donald's blog-- the first person who communicated on the cryptography discussion group with Bitcoin's creator Satoshi. A smarter guy, Eric S Raymond, the creator of "open source", who thinks women who shoot are sexy, blogged on the failure of feminism.

Alex Jones (as well as Henry Blodget, Gary North of Mises Institute, etc) is correct about Bitcoin being a ponzi-bubble and also the role it could play in destroying crypto-currencies. I have documented those two points extensively, just click my name and "Show Posts" and read the last 2 weeks of November 2013 archive of my posts. Then you will become much more knowledgeable than you.

Of course, most readers are in that zombie "get rich quick" state-of-mind, their brain is zapped with dopamine spikes, and their pre-frontal cortex has shut down as a result, thus they will totally ignore my post and not read the evidence and logic in my archived posts.


Gonzalo Lira explains why anonymity is so important but Bitcoin doesn't have it.

Quote
Also, actually acquiring bitcoins is remarkably complex—and completely negates the supposed anonymity of bitcoin. Here’s a Reddit editor discussing how tough it was for him to get bitcoins, which is fairly typical of retail customers: A whole lot of hassles, and he still couldn’t buy any. And for all the talk of “bitcoin’s anonymity”, you need a whole truckload of verifiable documents making clear who you are in order to buy your first bitcoin. So the bitcoin-anonymity argument is a chimera.

The failure to meet that condition—“buy or sell exclusively and necessarily with bitcoin”—is what makes bitcoin essentially useless.




Data taken from http://blockchain.info/charts

In the past 60 days bitcoin market price has increased by 8000%. If the cause of increase was widespread adoption of bitcoin as a currency, people would be making transactions. The number of transactions would increase by a similar percentage taking it to around 300000 transactions per day. The current number of transactions is around 75000 per day.

My take from the data is that bitcoin is in a massive speculative bubble. People are hoarding and not using bitcoin as a currency.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
December 10, 2013, 06:20:51 AM
 #117

Ron Paul says he was misquoted in the past on Bitcoin and he downplays the hype around Bitcoin:

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/2916084919001?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fb

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!