Well, it sure feels like 6 months ago.

[Incomer]

Great here comes the goonrush to ruin just one more thing. You guys just don't know when to quit.

Holy shit, the people you meet. You pay CSO or any other group any of that money at all yet or did you spend it all on your website? Honest question, I haven't kept up with the story.

Wait up... You aren't a goon? I thought you were.

[FreeMonies]

I was banned.

[Incomer]

I was banned.

Really, what for? You can't be all bad if they banned you. Then again if those fruit loops ban you you might be really bad, heh.

[kjj]

Gold has been around for thousands of years, and a lot of the reason why countries stopped using it as a currency was that it was too volatile.

Gold is the opposite of volatile.  Countries have stopped using gold because they can't just dilute everyone's gold holdings by printing more gold whenever they want.

[FreeMonies]

I was banned.

Really, what for? You can't be all bad if they banned you. Then again if those fruit loops ban you you might be really bad, heh.

A minor misunderstanding about some donations received.

[Grinder]

Gold is the opposite of volatile.  Countries have stopped using gold because they can't just dilute everyone's gold holdings by printing more gold whenever they want.

That's so obviously wrong it's ridiculous, and only shows how much you need to bend reality to make it fit with your world view.

[kjj]

Gold is the opposite of volatile.  Countries have stopped using gold because they can't just dilute everyone's gold holdings by printing more gold whenever they want.

That's so obviously wrong it's ridiculous, and only shows how much you need to bend reality to make it fit with your world view.

Are you saying that they actually can print more gold?

[Anonymous]

Gold is the opposite of volatile.  Countries have stopped using gold because they can't just dilute everyone's gold holdings by printing more gold whenever they want.

That's so obviously wrong it's ridiculous, and only shows how much you need to bend reality to make it fit with your world view.

Are you saying that they actually can print more gold?

No, he's saying that value can be dictated through flexible and intangible means or that it possibly doesn't exist at all; that the system of money is just a means you can manipulate to an end; a mere utility with little meaning besides tradition -- hence implying that humans are irrational.

...or maybe I'm looking too far into one man's vague opinion.

[Eli]

This is when I bought my last dozen or so Bitcoins, at about $4. Who here is in the same league? Who has yet to lose a dime even with this steep decline?

Well, I haven't invested money directly, but I'm working my ass off in Bitcoin related projects. And I enjoy every second of it.

I've first heard about Bitcoin around April with the SilkRoad bonanza and Gawker article, I've sense earned 18.23Ƀ from my Safebit Bitcoin project. As long as I can provide for my family I'm going to continue working on Bitcoin, I really think that it's going to be worth my while...

[Grinder]

Are you saying that they actually can print more gold?

Are you saying that they actually can print more silver?

The value of something is not locked just because it's hard to make more of it. If it was the proportional value of gold vs silver would always be the same.

[kjj]

Are you saying that they actually can print more gold?

Are you saying that they actually can print more silver?

The value of something is not locked just because it's hard to make more of it. If it was the proportional value of gold vs silver would always be the same.

Where the hell did silver come from?  I thought we were talking about gold.

[Grinder]

Where the hell did silver come from?  I thought we were talking about gold.

If you can't hold more than one thought at a time I understand why you think this is difficult.

[kjj]

Where the hell did silver come from?  I thought we were talking about gold.

If you can't hold more than one thought at a time I understand why you think this is difficult.

Well, I guess it was my fault for expecting a somewhat serious level of discussion.  If you want to be childish, I guess I'll just call you a poopy head and leave it at that.

For everyone else reading this thread, or if you someone that can explain things to you, maybe a younger brother, or a pet rock or something, I'll just mention one more thing.  In a fully floating system like we have now, it is impossible to measure the volatility of any one thing without measuring the volatility of every other thing at the same time.  If you look at just one pairing, say gold vs. dollars, or gold vs. silver, the best you can do is make a remark about the relative volatility of the pair.

That is, if you say that gold is volatile because the dollar value of an ounce varies a lot, the reverse claim is equally true.  Thus, the dollar is volatile, because the gold value of one dollar varies a lot.  It also means that statements at a remove are doubly worthless, so talking about silver vs. gold doesn't tell you anything at all about gold, or about silver, and it tells you even less than nothing about gold vs. dollars.

[kjj]

Only if you are limited to looking at one pair.

The reality is we can look at many pairings.

i.e. we can compare the volatility of gold to USD, gold to EUR, gold to xyz.
We can also compare volatility of USD:EUR. 

That those comparisons we can conclude that gold is much more volatile relative to other major currencies than the major currencies are to each other.

And that tells you what, exactly?  Think carefully.  Does it tell you something about gold?  Or does it tell you something about fiat currencies as a group?  Both?  Neither?

[Grinder]

And that tells you what, exactly?  Think carefully.  Does it tell you something about gold?  Or does it tell you something about fiat currencies as a group?  Both?  Neither?

I did of course know you would say that, which is why I used silver. Your only recourse to fix the cognitive dissonance was to pretend it was off topic.

The currencies are much more stable compared to pretty much everything you can buy than gold. You can of course pretend it's the gold that's stable and everything else that's varying in value, but then stability becomes meaningless.

When you reach this line your brain has probably already gone through the "NOOO!" fase and fixed the cognitive dissonance for you again. It's quite fascinating.

[Gerken]

And that tells you what, exactly?  Think carefully.  Does it tell you something about gold?  Or does it tell you something about fiat currencies as a group?  Both?  Neither?

I did of course know you would say that, which is why I used silver. Your only recourse to fix the cognitive dissonance was to pretend it was off topic.

The currencies are much more stable compared to pretty much everything you can buy than gold. You can of course pretend it's the gold that's stable and everything else that's varying in value, but then stability becomes meaningless.

When you reach this line your brain has probably already gone through the "NOOO!" fase and fixed the cognitive dissonance for you again. It's quite fascinating.

Post of the week right here folks.  

[kjj]

And that tells you what, exactly?  Think carefully.  Does it tell you something about gold?  Or does it tell you something about fiat currencies as a group?  Both?  Neither?

I did of course know you would say that, which is why I used silver. Your only recourse to fix the cognitive dissonance was to pretend it was off topic.

The currencies are much more stable compared to pretty much everything you can buy than gold. You can of course pretend it's the gold that's stable and everything else that's varying in value, but then stability becomes meaningless.

When you reach this line your brain has probably already gone through the "NOOO!" fase and fixed the cognitive dissonance for you again. It's quite fascinating.

Awesome.  I'm not just wrong, I have cognitive dissonance!  Holy shit, I should try that technique!  It seems much easier than actually supporting a position with like data and logic and stuff.

Here is a post showing a couple of examples from some diverse categories of goods, compared from 1984 to 2004.  Combine that with some historic gold data.  Virtually everything doubled in cost when measured in dollars, but only increased by 50% when priced in gold.

I know that one comparison from 1984 to 2004 isn't the whole picture.  Then again, you haven't presented any data at all.  So far all you've done is toss around some pointless insults and assert your position a couple of times.

I will concede one thing though.  I didn't notice any other prices change yesterday when gold dropped by $60/oz.  So, if you are willing to consider a short enough time frame, and ignore the money illusion, then the dollar can certainly appear to be quite stable.

I suppose I could also point out that when gold coins are used as currency, prices of everything in terms of those coins are extraordinarily stable.  Right up until someone decides to debase the coins.  See, for example, the fall of the Roman Empire.

[Grinder]

Here is a post showing a couple of examples from some diverse categories of goods, compared from 1984 to 2004.  Combine that with some historic gold data.  Virtually everything doubled in cost when measured in dollars, but only increased by 50% when priced in gold.

Wow. Thanks for doing such an excellent job at proving my point about cognitive dissonance. Do you really think you can convince me that gold is stable by asking me to ignore the most volatile years?

[FreeMonies]

Wrong thread.

[mjcmurfy]

The whole idea of people "investing" in bitcoins is idiotic. Bitcoin is not an investment vehicle, or else, SHOULD not be. It is designed to be a currency, not a commodity. People buy lots of it, and hoard it to realize future profits. That makes it more expensive for others to obtain it, therefore creating an artificial bubble in USD / fiat currency value, and reducing it's value as an actual currency. This bubble inevitably bursts, reducing the USD value over time.

But it's value in USD is not what is important. It only remains relevant while a small number of people hold a majority of the coins. Until these people stop treating it as an investable commodity, buying tones of it and selling once the price rises, of course the price will fluctuate wildly. People who hoard bitcoin will inevitably lose money, so why do they still do it?

When people actually start using their bitcoin to pay for goods and services, and retailers or service providers begin to accept it as payment, its true value will become apparent. I.e. not the USD equivalent value at any particular time, rather, it's purchasing power.

This will not happen as long as idiots think their $2000 of bitcoin will be worth millions in the future. Sorry to tell you that this WILL NOT HAPPEN. It might be worth millions though, if Mr. Bernanke persists with his policies of "quantitative easing'.

The value of a bitcoin is not its conversion value to fiat currency, rather it is in it's purchasing power. It's purchasing power is very low at the moment, because it has been badly harmed by speculators (miners, investors, and general hoarders).

Shame on all of you speculators out there! You are ruining the bitcoin project...