Bitcoin Forum
November 22, 2019, 11:17:06 AM *
News: Help collect the most notable posts made over the last 10 years.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: 11-27-13 Reuters: Bitcoin is a step back not forward  (Read 1995 times)
Steveia
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 77
Merit: 10


View Profile
December 01, 2013, 03:05:18 PM
 #1

Epic fail:

http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2013/11/27/edward-hadas-bitcoin-is-a-step-back-not-forward/

Establishment cronies cannot accept any currency unless it is government issued. The threat that government can outlaw Bitcoin is absurd--no one government controls Bitcoin (no government controls Bitcoin). It is decentralized. Exchangers can be outlawed, but this will drive the Bitcoin economy even more underground.
1574421426
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574421426

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574421426
Reply with quote  #2

1574421426
Report to moderator
1574421426
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574421426

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574421426
Reply with quote  #2

1574421426
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin Forum is turning 10 years old! Join the community in sharing and exploring the notable posts made over the years.
1574421426
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574421426

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574421426
Reply with quote  #2

1574421426
Report to moderator
1574421426
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1574421426

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1574421426
Reply with quote  #2

1574421426
Report to moderator
goxed
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 1000


Mining hardware dev and reviewer.


View Profile
December 02, 2013, 07:25:21 AM
 #2

"Money is inevitably a tool of the state." whaaat!

Looking to review Bitcoin / Crypto mining Hardware.
beetcoin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250


View Profile
December 02, 2013, 07:36:57 AM
 #3

Quote
hey will fail, because money that is not issued by governments is always doomed to failure.

so where do they come up with this? this is such fallible logic; there has never been anything like bitcoin, so to make such claims is ludicrous. the correct way of putting it is that "we don't know if bitcoin will work or not, because there has never been anything like it in the history of mankind."

instead, this guy is just an apologist for the establishment.
pgbit
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 413
Merit: 252


Secure, Efficient, Simple Cryptocurrency Exchange


View Profile
January 23, 2014, 12:38:54 AM
 #4

I am just guessing that comments are turned off, at the bottom of that partisan article.

His comment: "there would be no authority which could decide how much new money to print. Indeed, the knowledge that governments could not create new bitcoins in a crisis would only increase thrift" is priceless
as it appears to be a self-admission of failure to understand the current problems with governments, banks and fiat. Implicitly suggesting that thrift is bad in a crisis (bad for who?), yet with no mention of the potentially devastating harm to whole populations with fractional reserve lending, debt and hyper-inflation.




                                         ◢◣                      ◢◣ 
                                    ◢◤ █ ◥◣           ◢◤     ◥◣   
                                ◢◤     █     ◥◣   ◢◤             ◥◣
                                █        █         ◥◤                     █
                                █        █     ◢◤   ◥◣             ◢▉
                                █        █ ◢◤           ◥◣     ◢◤ █
                                █        █◤                   ◢█◤     ▊
                                █                             ◢◤           █
                                █                         ◢◤               █
                                █                    ◢◤                    █
                                █                ◢◤                        █ 
                                █           ◢◤                             █
                                █      ◢█◤                   ◢█       ▊
                                █ ◢◤      ◥◣           ◢◤ █       █
                                █◤              ◥◣   ◢◤     █       █
                                █                     ◢◣          ▊       ▊
                                ◥◣              ◢◤   ◥◣     █     ◢◤
                                    ◥◣     ◢◤            ◥◣ █ ◢◤
                                         ◥◤                       ◥◤


HYDAX
     Secure
Efficient
Simple   
  Medium 
   Twitter   
    Telegram 
cr1776
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1066


View Profile
January 23, 2014, 12:41:10 AM
 #5

I am just guessing that comments are turned off, at the bottom of that partisan article.

His comment: "there would be no authority which could decide how much new money to print. Indeed, the knowledge that governments could not create new bitcoins in a crisis would only increase thrift" is priceless
as it appears to be a self-admission of failure to understand the current problems with governments, banks and fiat. Implicitly suggesting that thrift is bad in a crisis (bad for who?), yet with no mention of the potentially devastating harm to whole populations with fractional reserve lending, debt and hyper-inflation.



Comments were on for me. FYI
odolvlobo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2688
Merit: 1442



View Profile
January 23, 2014, 12:50:49 AM
 #6

His basic thesis is that money must be centrally managed and that only a government is capable of doing that.

Buy stuff on Amazon at a discount with bitcoins or convert Amazon points to bitcoins: Purse.io
Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns.
oakpacific
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 23, 2014, 02:23:43 AM
 #7

Yup, like how classical liberalism is a step back to totalitarianism.

Not every idea more recent is one with good merits.

https://tlsnotary.org/ Fraud proofing decentralized fiat-Bitcoin trading.
Dabs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1326


The Concierge of Crypto


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2014, 02:39:22 AM
 #8

Quote
Bitcoin exemplifies some of the problems of private money. Its value is uncertain, its legal status is unclear and it could easily become valueless if users lose faith. Besides, if bitcoin ever really started to take off, governments would either ban it or take over the system.

Uncertain = maybe this means volatile.
Legal status = not really needed or required, but would be nice if "accepted" by governments, like Fincen etc.
Ban it = how do you ban the internet? Try banning torrents.
Take over the system = well, they can certainly do that, but at what cost to them?

Quote
But I suspect another important factor is political: bitcoin appeals because governments are not fully living up to the responsibility that comes with state-sponsored money. Bitcoin, or something like it, will thrive until the authorities do better.

And authorities can only do better by creating a decentralized coin that has initial funding from the government.

bitbouillion
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 870
Merit: 250



View Profile
January 23, 2014, 02:49:12 AM
 #9

Quote
They will fail, because money that is not issued by governments is always doomed to failure.

This guy did poor research. What he claims is true for government issued money. Average life time in history is 27 years. Only 23% of government issued currencies have survived. That's a poor track record.  It's only a matter of time when a government issued currency fails.

http://dollardaze.org/blog/?post_id=00405&cat_id=17


Bitware
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938
Merit: 1001


weaving spiders come not here


View Profile
January 23, 2014, 08:02:01 AM
 #10

Since we lost the net neutrality battle, ISP's may be able to "prioritize" data.

That said, banning Bitcoin is as simple as filtering the protocol at the ISP level. Simply drop the packets. But I do not see that happening any time soon, as their greed makes them want to control and guide it for maximum profitability. They see regular people prying open their wallets to obtain BTC's and associated Bitcoin technology. Something their advertising/psychological professionals have not been able to do so completely, so they will want to harvest from this new-found path to extract more of our saved wealth from us..

Dabs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1326


The Concierge of Crypto


View Profile WWW
January 23, 2014, 08:37:16 AM
 #11

That said, banning Bitcoin is as simple as filtering the protocol at the ISP level. Simply drop the packets.

How do you identify the protocol or packets? What if it was encrypted?

bitlancr
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 02:07:41 PM
 #12

So what's a step forward to this guy? More centralisation, and top-down (mis)management? One world fiat currency? No thanks.
davidgdg
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 528
Merit: 500


View Profile
February 27, 2014, 04:11:14 PM
 #13

He quotes Graeber's book. I've read that book. Still not sure what it says.

"There is only one thing that is seriously morally wrong with the world, and that is politics. By 'politics' I mean all that, and only what, involves the State." Jan Lester "Escape from Leviathan"
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!