rpietila Altcoin Observer

[AnonyMint]

Can we get back to talking about AnonyMint's idea of government backed digital currencies? It's something that seems inevitable but everyone seems to conveniently ignore.

Imagine the efficiency of tax collecting through a database of currency you control. It's the government's ultimate weapon.

Seriously please don't.
I advise rpietila to moderate post about this. This such a boring old subject that has been discussed all over Bitcointalk "What if government blabla"
Truth is government will not succeed because no one will support it this is the whole idea behind Bitcoin, that Bitcoin is unstoppable, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a complete tin foil hat that can go back to the conspiracy forum.

Can we go back to technical discussions about altcoins and not some conspiracy nut job theories from AnonyMint.

You will eat those words you fool, rammed through your arsehole by a jackbookjackboot.

Your pride in Bitcoin is not factually justified.

And it is very relevant to altcoins.

[georgehosterguy]

what's a jackbook?

Edit:  Just figured out it was jackBOOT 

[Skinnkavaj]

You will eat those words you fool, rammed through your arsehole by a jackbook.

Your pride in Bitcoin is not factually justified.

And it is very relevant to altcoins.

Do you think you are the only one on this forum with conspiracy theories? This has been discussed 1000 times already, just take a look at post from 2011 and 2012. It's not even relevant anymore and if something like this were to threaten bitcoin there are other subforums here on Bitcointalk for it.

This thread should be about technical discussions for altcoins and not some boring old conspiracy theory.

I see three categories right now as an altcoin investor:
PoS coins
Anonymous coins
2.0 coins

Would you categorize it further down?

[79b79aa8d5047da6d3XX]

Can we get back to ... government backed digital currencies? It's something that seems inevitable but everyone seems to conveniently ignore.

Yes, the problem is that when the Ecuadorian (or any other) economy faces some serious problem, as it sooner or later will, the Central Bank/ digital mint will be able to distort the money supply, and the Economic Ministry will probably take measures to rescue the economy that are based on exerting control over the currency. These measures may or may not work for overcoming the short or mid terms problems of the economy. But the exchange value of the currency will certainly be affected, and possibly not in your favor. So you better trust those in charge, permanently. Or be on their side.

It reminds me of a recent announcement by the Argentinian Central Bank (I think they took it down but you can look for it http://www.bcra.gov.ar) where they warned citizens against Bitcoin, because its value is known to fluctuate, and could go down. The Argentinian Central Bank, which has presided over the wiping out the value of the peso at least three times in recent memory!

[devphp]

I am still waiting to hear how digital or digitized is different from fiat in electronic form. Fiat is fiat, no matter how you slice it. Fiat is 'by decree'.

Crypto currencies function by no decree. They are decentrally produced.

And it's not even by decree that matters, although that is important too. What matters is predictability of supply, which never works for fiat, because governments always tend to overspend and overproduce fiat. Fiat has been around for ages and we all know how it ends every time. So what does Ecuador change here?

[aminorex]

You might do better to using timing to separate your rhetoric from your reason.

You are such an idiot.

Rhetoric.

You have massive category errors.

Fact.

See, easy to bucket.  Now just separate them instead of mixing them, and your audience goes way up.

To be truly elite, separate them, and then refrain from posting the rhetoric.  I haven't reached that level myself.

[aminorex]

what's a jackbook?

New Apple laptop, I think.

[iCEBREAKER]

You are such an idiot.

Whereas, Armstrong made specific predictions of specific events at specific times, that could not match any other events. And he was never wrong. Never.

If Armstrong is prescient as well as infallible, why didn't he know ahead of time that he would be sent to jail for bilking investors, not get a fair trial, and so on?

Since he couldn't avoid being thrown in a hole for 7 years, he's not exactly the sharpest shooter in Texas.  

ES, govt backed digi-fiat isn't a new idea.  The Canadian mint floated, then abandoned the idea already.

[Este Nuno]

Can we get back to talking about AnonyMint's idea of government backed digital currencies? It's something that seems inevitable but everyone seems to conveniently ignore.

Imagine the efficiency of tax collecting through a database of currency you control. It's the government's ultimate weapon.

Seriously please don't.
I advise rpietila to moderate post about this. This such a boring old subject that has been discussed all over Bitcointalk "What if government blabla"
Truth is government will not succeed because no one will support it this is the whole idea behind Bitcoin, that Bitcoin is unstoppable, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a complete tin foil hat that can go back to the conspiracy forum.

Can we go back to technical discussions about altcoins and not some conspiracy nut job theories from AnonyMint.

I'm not the type that people would consider a 'nut job' I don't think and I don't agree with many of AnonyMint's theories on what's going to happen with the world, but do people really think that in 20-50 years the world will still be passing around pieces of paper? It's not even a question of if, it's a question of when.

What sort of government wouldn't love to eliminate cash and control their currency through a centralised database? They have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

To dismiss this as some kind of crackpot theory seems very odd to me.

[btc-mike]

Can we get back to talking about AnonyMint's idea of government backed digital currencies? It's something that seems inevitable but everyone seems to conveniently ignore.

Imagine the efficiency of tax collecting through a database of currency you control. It's the government's ultimate weapon.

Seriously please don't.
I advise rpietila to moderate post about this. This such a boring old subject that has been discussed all over Bitcointalk "What if government blabla"
Truth is government will not succeed because no one will support it this is the whole idea behind Bitcoin, that Bitcoin is unstoppable, and anyone who thinks otherwise is just a complete tin foil hat that can go back to the conspiracy forum.

Can we go back to technical discussions about altcoins and not some conspiracy nut job theories from AnonyMint.

I'm not the type that people would consider a 'nut job' I don't think and I don't agree with many of AnonyMint's theories on what's going to happen with the world, but do people really think that in 20-50 years the world will still be passing around pieces of paper? It's not even a question of if, it's a question of when.

What sort of government wouldn't love to eliminate cash and control their currency through a centralised database? They have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

To dismiss this as some kind of crackpot theory seems very odd to me.

That sounds like a new thread - The Altcoin Predictor.

[AnonyMint]

Skinnkavaj,

Your only refutation is "no one will use the government coin".

I told you already that the people in the developing world for the most part don't have money to invest in coins. They are rather users of the coin to get paid. Thus they will use what ever they are told to use by the government and large crony corporations that run the developing world.

So if you can't even get your basic demographics correct, then you are not qualified to categorize my post as a conspiracy theory.

It seems you are not a person of factual analysis.

That sounds like a new thread - The Altcoin Predictor.

If you are going to get any traction with an altcoin in the developing world, you have to enable them to get paid with it. I have specific ideas for this, but I am not going to share them publicly at this time.

That isn't relevant to observing and analyzing existing altcoins?

[Este Nuno]

I am still waiting to hear how digital or digitized is different from fiat in electronic form. Fiat is fiat, no matter how you slice it. Fiat is 'by decree'.

Crypto currencies function by no decree. They are decentrally produced.

And it's not even by decree that matters, although that is important too. What matters is predictability of supply, which never works for fiat, because governments always tend to overspend and overproduce fiat. Fiat has been around for ages and we all know how it ends every time. So what does Ecuador change here?

Yes, full fledged digital fiat and decentralised cryptocurrencies are a separate animal. One question might be why the average person would want to use something like bitcoin when the government is offering them what they know already in a safer and more convenient form. That's average people, not us. Not predominately white, educated, tech focused investors and speculators.

And as AnonyMint pointed out, Hong Kong has already started transitioning to this sort of system many years ago(10?) by way of their octopus smart cards. Which are quite convenient and easy to use. And money there is printed by private banks as well which is interesting and different.


Is everyone here really fully convinced of Bitcoin hegemony in the near future?  


edit: Altcoins are the only hope.

[devphp]

I told you already that the people in the developing world for the most part don't have money to invest in coins.

Actually, that's incorrect. People in the developing world have much higher savings rates than people in developed world countries. It doesn't mean most of them wouldn't go for tangible stores of value, but some could and do invest in cryptos too.

Yes, full fledged digital fiat and decentralised cryptocurrencies are a separate animal. One question might be why the average person would want to use something like bitcoin when the government is offering them what they know already in a safer and more convenient form.

Because supply of crypto currencies is predictable and cannot be inflated at a whim and thus can be a store of value?

[AnonyMint]

I told you already that the people in the developing world for the most part don't have money to invest in coins.

Actually, that's incorrect. People in the developing world have much higher savings rates than people in developed world countries. It doesn't mean most of them wouldn't go for tangible stores of value, but some could and do invest in cryptos too.

You have a math error.

A higher percentage rate of 1/10 the income, doesn't mean they have more to invest. In fact, food is stilll 30% of their budget. And as always the savings is power-law distributed and most of the people in the developing world have very little savings because they can barely meet their basic consumption expenses (and they've gotten a taste of materialism and spend to join the lifestyle of westerners).

[Skinnkavaj]

Skinnkavaj,

Your only refutation is "no one will use the government coin".

I told you already that the people in the developing world for the most part don't have money to invest in coins. They are rather users of the coin to get paid. Thus they will use what ever they are told to use by the government and large crony corporations that run the developing world.

So if you can't even get your basic demographics correct, then you are not qualified to categorize my post as a conspiracy theory.

It seems you are not a person of factual analysis.

If you are going to get any traction with an altcoin in the developing world, you have to enable them to get paid with it. I have specific ideas for this, but I am not going to share them publicly at this time.

Equadors currency does not even fit the term "coin" as minted by the Bitcoin community. We are here to discuss coins, or crypto currencies, defined by that they are a decentralized ledger.

If you still want to discuss this AnonyMint, I suggest you start a new thread called "Centralized ledger observer".

[AnonyMint]

Skinnkavaj,

Your only refutation is "no one will use the government coin".

I told you already that the people in the developing world for the most part don't have money to invest in coins. They are rather users of the coin to get paid. Thus they will use what ever they are told to use by the government and large crony corporations that run the developing world.

So if you can't even get your basic demographics correct, then you are not qualified to categorize my post as a conspiracy theory.

It seems you are not a person of factual analysis.

If you are going to get any traction with an altcoin in the developing world, you have to enable them to get paid with it. I have specific ideas for this, but I am not going to share them publicly at this time.

Equadors currency does not even fit the term "coin" as minted by the Bitcoin community. We are here to discuss coins, or crypto currencies, defined by that they are a decentralized ledger.

If you still want to discuss this AnonyMint, I suggest you start a new thread called "Centralized ledger observer".

Are you going to continue trolling?

I just explained that the issue of altcoin adoption in the developing world is threatened. And if an altcoin is going to compete it needs to be very proactive now on generating income for the developing world people, because they are not investors in crypto-currency. They are workers and earners of income.

This is a very relevant discussion about altcoin demographics.

You are just trolling.

Yes, full fledged digital fiat and decentralised cryptocurrencies are a separate animal. One question might be why the average person would want to use something like bitcoin when the government is offering them what they know already in a safer and more convenient form.

Because supply of crypto currencies is predictable and cannot be inflated at a whim and thus can be a store of value?

You have a demographic error.

The developing world people don't give a rats ass about central banking.

I live in the developing world. I ask them all the time. They don't even know what a central bank is you FOOL.

[devphp]

You have a math error.

A higher percentage rate of 1/10 the income, doesn't mean they have more to invest. In fact, food is stilll 30% of their budget. And as always the savings is power-law distributed and most of the people in the developing world have very little savings because they can barely meet their basic consumption expenses (and they've gotten a taste of materialism and spend to join the lifestyle of westerners).

No I don't have an error. I'd bet an average Chinese has more to invest than an average American. This works on both personal and on a country level. Who is the largest debtor nation of the world? Who is the largest creditor nation of the world?

[AnonyMint]

You have a math error.

A higher percentage rate of 1/10 the income, doesn't mean they have more to invest. In fact, food is stilll 30% of their budget. And as always the savings is power-law distributed and most of the people in the developing world have very little savings because they can barely meet their basic consumption expenses (and they've gotten a taste of materialism and spend to join the lifestyle of westerners).

No I don't have an error. I'd bet an average Chinese has more to invest than an average American. This works on both personal and on a country level. Who is the largest debtor nation of the world? Who is the largest creditor nation of the world?

The developing world is not China any more dumbass. You are like 10 - 15 years behind the times.

China has already banned Bitcoin for use as a currency.

If crypto-currencies will be for investment only, they are useless.

[devphp]

The developing world is not China any more dumbass. You are like 10 - 15 years behind the times.

You said 6 billion people. Who are they? So you agree then that Chinese can invest because they have a lot of savings and would like to diversify from Renminbi which their government likes to inflate too?

China has already banned Bitcoin for use as a currency.

And you think 1.5 bln. people will just stand and watch in silence their savings in fiat fade away and at least some of those Chinese not try to do anything about it. You're being naive in thinking that if something's banned, nobody will use it. Among other things that can function as store of value they will use crypto currencies too, be sure of it. And it doesn't have to function as currency at merchant level, peer-to-peer level is good enough.

[Este Nuno]

Yes, full fledged digital fiat and decentralised cryptocurrencies are a separate animal. One question might be why the average person would want to use something like bitcoin when the government is offering them what they know already in a safer and more convenient form.

Because supply of crypto currencies is predictable and cannot be inflated at a whim and thus can be a store of value?

Do you think the average person really cares about such things, or is going to become educated on such matters in our lifetime?