Bitcoin Forum
November 25, 2017, 12:17:11 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 [1125] 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2014263 times)
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 05, 2015, 04:56:12 PM
 #22481

Absolutely true. Value is a "nominalization" to borrow a term from NLP: http://youtu.be/1sceRsmT1yc

To further elucidate the points made in the video, nominalization (a.k.a. reification, or what Mises called hypostatization, the tendency toward which he named "the worst enemy of clear thinking") is when you convert an abstract concept or action/process into a noun, and then end up treating that noun as a sort of "thing in itself" and allow it take on some properties of a physical object. As a loose figure of speech it is innocent enough, but - as is always the case - when we try to take loose phrasing from everyday talk into more rigorous contexts without cleaning it up, the result is mass confusion leading to all sorts of fallacious reasoning. As the speaker said, politicians love to make use of this confusion.

Another way to talk about this is to call any conversion of an abstract concept or action/process into a noun "nominalization," since that what it literally is, but then to call the fallacious taking-seriously of this "reification" or "hypostatization." My preferred term is reification to refer to the error.

Some classic nominalizations and corresponding reifications:



As may be evident from the examples, when you start off with a loose nominalization (using nouns because they're convenient in English) you can end up committing the fallacy of reification. How exactly does the slip happen? There is actually another semantic error at work here: equivocation, where a word is used in two different meanings at the speaker's convenience, or inadvertently.

In other words, what happens in each case is that the noun form of the word being the same as the verb form makes it especially easy to switch back and forth between them, and pretty soon the people forget that the noun they are talking about is not an entity, but actually some process that itself involves physical objects or entities: water molecules that wave, people that value gold bars, mileposts that are spaced out. It's incoherent to speak of a wave without something doing the waving, or to speak of gold having value without someone doing the valuing, or to speak of space curving if we are maintaining that space=nothingness. It becomes an implied equivocation because the meaning of "wave," "value," and "space" has subtly been allowed to change in the course of the argument. Whereas we started off taking it as obvious that some objects were waving, some people were valuing something, and some objects were spaced, we ended up silently shifting the meaning to exclude those objects and people.

Now the term "intrinsic value" might have been useful if not for this reification trap. We could use it to refer to the direct use value people place on something, as opposed to its exchange value in the market, as even Mises himself did. Unfortunately, all experience hath shewn that the word intrinsic overwhelmingly tends to lead people into the reification error described above, because this is a basic human tendency baked into the social pressure of language (things that "sound right" tend to carry a weight that feels like social authority). Intrinsic sounds like "in and of itself," with no reference to a valuator. This tendency makes using this word just asking for trouble. It invites misunderstanding time and again.

To be clearer, then, I strongly recommend avoiding the term "intrinsic value" and instead using "direct use value" or similar to distinguish from exchange value.

that's probably not a bad idea. 

the term "intrinsic" has been abused quite markedly in the whole Bitcoin vs gold debate, especially when describing gold.  it reflects both a laziness in the use of the language or just sheer inability to understand the multiple facets and intricacies of gold valuation and how they compare to something even more complex, ie, Bitcoin.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511612231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511612231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511612231
Reply with quote  #2

1511612231
Report to moderator
1511612231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511612231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511612231
Reply with quote  #2

1511612231
Report to moderator
1511612231
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511612231

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511612231
Reply with quote  #2

1511612231
Report to moderator
sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 05, 2015, 05:08:31 PM
 #22482

pack your bags.  we're going up.

Soon?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 05, 2015, 07:16:23 PM
 #22483

pack your bags.  we're going up.

Soon?


Soon is all relative.
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408



View Profile
April 05, 2015, 07:38:23 PM
 #22484

Value, as a concept, is inherently subjective.

Therefore the "intrinsic" adjective is redundant so should be just dropped for correctness once you grok the value=subjective bit. Intrinsic value is a sloppy term, historically used to describe the objective physical properties, e.g. conductivity, malleability, corrosion-resistance of gold, silver, lead. The intrinsic properties of objects can be valued, but the existence of the properties themselves is an objective reality that can not be extended to the human values placed upon them.

 ^ This

"If people value something, it has value; if people do not value some­thing, it does not have value; and there is no intrinsic about it."

or, as someone on reddit put it more boldly:

nothing is fucking intrinsically valuable.

in yet other words: "the eval() function is context-sensitive"

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 05, 2015, 08:06:06 PM
 #22485

Mycelium now working with Trezor.  Dynamite combo.
NotHatinJustTrollin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 08:33:49 PM
 #22486

Value, as a concept, is inherently subjective.

Therefore the "intrinsic" adjective is redundant so should be just dropped for correctness once you grok the value=subjective bit. Intrinsic value is a sloppy term, historically used to describe the objective physical properties, e.g. conductivity, malleability, corrosion-resistance of gold, silver, lead. The intrinsic properties of objects can be valued, but the existence of the properties themselves is an objective reality that can not be extended to the human values placed upon them.

 ^ This

"If people value something, it has value; if people do not value some­thing, it does not have value; and there is no intrinsic about it."

or, as someone on reddit put it more boldly:

nothing is fucking intrinsically valuable.

in yet other words: "the eval() function is context-sensitive"

We can stay here all day talking about the definition of intrinsic value, but at the end of the day, what some people refer to when they say "intrinsic value" is that people use it for itself and not only for its functions as money (medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value).

Example: People use gold for itself (jewellery etc). Therefore gold has "intrinsic value".
You can call it whatever you want, thing is, it's something fiat money or bitcoin don't have.
Whether that "intrinsic value" is culturally determined or not doesn't matter. RIGHT NOW people use gold for itself. They don't do that with fiat or bitcoin.
It's quite simple really.

By the way, I'm no gold bug and I don't use that argument to say that gold is better money (because I don't think it is).



"Im here to tell you the ability to publish information to an immutable globally shared memory system (history) is its intrinsic use"
^^^How is that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin? It's the blockchain that can do that not bitcoin, bitcoin is the blockchain security mechanism/reward token. Any distributed ledger/database could do that.
Last of the V8s
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


Be a bank


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 08:37:54 PM
 #22487


 But in this thread, which is the center of bitcoin knowledge,


are you on crack? sane people occasionally pop in here, but mostly it's a troll thread for self-deluding old scatterbrains

I do not accept segwit outputs as payment, nor send them.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 08:44:55 PM
 #22488

Value, as a concept, is inherently subjective.

Therefore the "intrinsic" adjective is redundant so should be just dropped for correctness once you grok the value=subjective bit. Intrinsic value is a sloppy term, historically used to describe the objective physical properties, e.g. conductivity, malleability, corrosion-resistance of gold, silver, lead. The intrinsic properties of objects can be valued, but the existence of the properties themselves is an objective reality that can not be extended to the human values placed upon them.

 ^ This

"If people value something, it has value; if people do not value some­thing, it does not have value; and there is no intrinsic about it."

or, as someone on reddit put it more boldly:

nothing is fucking intrinsically valuable.

in yet other words: "the eval() function is context-sensitive"

We can stay here all day talking about the definition of intrinsic value, but at the end of the day, what some people refer to when they say "intrinsic value" is that people use it for itself and not only for its functions as money (medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value).

Example: People use gold for itself (jewellery etc). Therefore gold has "intrinsic value".
You can call it whatever you want, thing is, it's something fiat money or bitcoin don't have.
Whether that "intrinsic value" is culturally determined or not doesn't matter. RIGHT NOW people use gold for itself. They don't do that with fiat or bitcoin.
It's quite simple really.

By the way, I'm no gold bug and I don't use that argument to say that gold is better money (because I don't think it is).



"Im here to tell you the ability to publish information to an immutable globally shared memory system (history) is its intrinsic use"
^^^How is that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin? It's the blockchain that can do that not bitcoin, bitcoin is the blockchain security mechanism/reward token. Any distributed ledger/database could do that.

still doesn't get it  Cheesy

just do us a favor and get your sorry concern troll ass out of here.


"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
NotHatinJustTrollin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 08:48:31 PM
 #22489

Value, as a concept, is inherently subjective.

Therefore the "intrinsic" adjective is redundant so should be just dropped for correctness once you grok the value=subjective bit. Intrinsic value is a sloppy term, historically used to describe the objective physical properties, e.g. conductivity, malleability, corrosion-resistance of gold, silver, lead. The intrinsic properties of objects can be valued, but the existence of the properties themselves is an objective reality that can not be extended to the human values placed upon them.

 ^ This

"If people value something, it has value; if people do not value some­thing, it does not have value; and there is no intrinsic about it."

or, as someone on reddit put it more boldly:

nothing is fucking intrinsically valuable.

in yet other words: "the eval() function is context-sensitive"

We can stay here all day talking about the definition of intrinsic value, but at the end of the day, what some people refer to when they say "intrinsic value" is that people use it for itself and not only for its functions as money (medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value).

Example: People use gold for itself (jewellery etc). Therefore gold has "intrinsic value".
You can call it whatever you want, thing is, it's something fiat money or bitcoin don't have.
Whether that "intrinsic value" is culturally determined or not doesn't matter. RIGHT NOW people use gold for itself. They don't do that with fiat or bitcoin.
It's quite simple really.

By the way, I'm no gold bug and I don't use that argument to say that gold is better money (because I don't think it is).



"Im here to tell you the ability to publish information to an immutable globally shared memory system (history) is its intrinsic use"
^^^How is that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin? It's the blockchain that can do that not bitcoin, bitcoin is the blockchain security mechanism/reward token. Any distributed ledger/database could do that.

still doesn't get it  Cheesy

just do us a favor and get your sorry concern troll ass out of here.


sdp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 415



View Profile WWW
April 05, 2015, 09:02:37 PM
 #22490


Example: People use gold for itself (jewellery etc). Therefore gold has "intrinsic value".
You can call it whatever you want, thing is, it's something fiat money or bitcoin don't have.
Whether that "intrinsic value" is culturally determined or not doesn't matter. RIGHT NOW people use gold for itself. They don't do that with fiat or bitcoin.
It's quite simple really.

By the way, I'm no gold bug and I don't use that argument to say that gold is better money (because I don't think it is).



"Im here to tell you the ability to publish information to an immutable globally shared memory system (history) is its intrinsic use"
^^^How is that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin? It's the blockchain that can do that not bitcoin, bitcoin is the blockchain security mechanism/reward token. Any distributed ledger/database could do that.

I happen to agree with you but I would tend to use ironic statements instead:

I can blow my nose with paper money.  So it has "intrinsic value".  I look at people who would waste gold on making jewlery and find it is rather analogous.  Copper is much more useful than paper, but the same weight of paper in paper money is considered more valuable.  Miners for some reason do not want to accept $200 in pennies for a bitcion.

But the next time someone says gold has intrinsic value therefore worth more, offer that five cents in pennies should be considered worth more than a hundred dollar bill by the same argument.  Dollars, Euros, bitcoin, they are all tokens in a monetary system.

What gives bitcoin more value over say, its many other altcoins?  It is all of the people who decide to back it.  It ironically is the most light weight cryptocurrency because there are many spv-wallets, whereas often altcoins only have Satoshi clients.

sdp

██████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████
█████                                    █████
█████                                    █████
█████                                    █████
█████           ▄█▄        ▄█▄           █████
█████          ████████████████          █████
█████           ▀████████████▀           █████
█████           ████▀    ▀████           █████
█████           ████▄    ▄████           █████
█████           ▄████████████▄           █████
█████          ████████████████          █████
█████           ▀█▀        ▀█▀           █████
█████                                    █████
█████                                    █████
█████                                    █████
██████████████████████████████████████████████
██████████████████████████████████████████████
▄██████████████████████████▄
██                        ██
██                        ██
██                        ██
██             ▄█▀███████████
██              ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██▀
██                        ██
██                        ██
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

▄██████████████████████████▄
██                        ██
██                        ██
██                        ██
██                        ██
████████████████████████████
██                        ██
██                        ██
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▄██████████████████████████▄
██                 ▄███▀  ██
██             ▄▄██▀▀  ▄█ ██
██     ▄    ▄███▀▀  ▄███  ██
██    ██▄▄██▀▀   ▄█████   ██
██   ████▀▀  ▄▄██▀▀ ▀█    ██
██  █▀▀   ▄▄██▀           ██
██    ▄▄███▀              ██
██▄▄▄████▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

▄██████████████████████████▄
██                        ██
██  ████▄  ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄   ██
██     ▀█▄ ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀██    ██
██      ██         ██     ██
██       ███████████      ██
██        ▄▄     ▄▄       ██
██       ▀██▀   ▀██▀      ██
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
▄██████████████████████████▄
██                       ▄██
██                     █████
██         ▄         ███▀ ██
██       ▄███     ▄███▀   ██
██   ▄▄███▀▀███▄████▀     ██
██▄▄███▀     ▀███▀        ██
████▀                     ██
██▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

▄███████████▄  ██████████████
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
█           █  █            █
██████▀██████  ██████▀███████
 ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀   ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 10:25:18 PM
 #22491

Absolutely true. Value is a "nominalization" to borrow a term from NLP: http://youtu.be/1sceRsmT1yc

To further elucidate the points made in the video, nominalization (a.k.a. reification, or what Mises called hypostatization, the tendency toward which he named "the worst enemy of clear thinking") is when you convert an abstract concept or action/process into a noun, and then end up treating that noun as a sort of "thing in itself" and allow it take on some properties of a physical object. As a loose figure of speech it is innocent enough, but - as is always the case - when we try to take loose phrasing from everyday talk into more rigorous contexts without cleaning it up, the result is mass confusion leading to all sorts of fallacious reasoning. As the speaker said, politicians love to make use of this confusion.

Another way to talk about this is to call any conversion of an abstract concept or action/process into a noun "nominalization," since that what it literally is, but then to call the fallacious taking-seriously of this "reification" or "hypostatization." My preferred term is reification to refer to the error.

Some classic nominalizations and corresponding reifications:



As may be evident from the examples, when you start off with a loose nominalization (using nouns because they're convenient in English) you can end up committing the fallacy of reification. How exactly does the slip happen? There is actually another semantic error at work here: equivocation, where a word is used in two different meanings at the speaker's convenience, or inadvertently.

In other words, what happens in each case is that the noun form of the word being the same as the verb form makes it especially easy to switch back and forth between them, and pretty soon the people forget that the noun they are talking about is not an entity, but actually some process that itself involves physical objects or entities: water molecules that wave, people that value gold bars, mileposts that are spaced out. It's incoherent to speak of a wave without something doing the waving, or to speak of gold having value without someone doing the valuing, or to speak of space curving if we are maintaining that space=nothingness. It becomes an implied equivocation because the meaning of "wave," "value," and "space" has subtly been allowed to change in the course of the argument. Whereas we started off taking it as obvious that some objects were waving, some people were valuing something, and some objects were spaced, we ended up silently shifting the meaning to exclude those objects and people.

Now the term "intrinsic value" might have been useful if not for this reification trap. We could use it to refer to the direct use value people place on something, as opposed to its exchange value in the market, as even Mises himself did. Unfortunately, all experience hath shewn that the word intrinsic overwhelmingly tends to lead people into the reification error described above, because this is a basic human tendency baked into the social pressure of language (things that "sound right" tend to carry a weight that feels like social authority). Intrinsic sounds like "in and of itself," with no reference to a valuator. This tendency makes using this word just asking for trouble. It invites misunderstanding time and again.

To be clearer, then, I strongly recommend avoiding the term "intrinsic value" and instead using "direct use value" or similar to distinguish from exchange value.

You are right that the word can be misused. I protest the distruction of the word through this misuse, and state that "intrinsic" value as the value otherwise referred to as value "for direct use", is good.

The alternative "for direct use" can also easily be muddled by people not wanting the secrets of money to be revealed. For example, a wholesaler have no direct use for his wares, due to the share volume he trades, that does not mean that the value of his commodity is not intrinsic.

I am really annoyed by the "intrinsic value is impossible, the value is subjective, stupid" lectures that is going on. I put forward that the value of something is intrinsic, not that it is objective. Of course it is subjective, no value can exist unless there is someone that prefers one thing over another, with no responsibility towards nature or anyone else to explain why he thinks so.

If we let trolls destroy every word, discourse is made impossible, which may be the purpose of the destruction of the word. Again I propose that this forum and this thread is at the forefront of understanding gold, fiat and bitcoin, and we need clear concepts. I cannot correct these errors in all threads, the volume of confusion is too high, but in this limited space it is possible.




Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 10:59:00 PM
 #22492


Example: People use gold for itself (jewellery etc). Therefore gold has "intrinsic value".
You can call it whatever you want, thing is, it's something fiat money or bitcoin don't have.
Whether that "intrinsic value" is culturally determined or not doesn't matter. RIGHT NOW people use gold for itself. They don't do that with fiat or bitcoin.
It's quite simple really.

By the way, I'm no gold bug and I don't use that argument to say that gold is better money (because I don't think it is).



"Im here to tell you the ability to publish information to an immutable globally shared memory system (history) is its intrinsic use"
^^^How is that the intrinsic value of a bitcoin? It's the blockchain that can do that not bitcoin, bitcoin is the blockchain security mechanism/reward token. Any distributed ledger/database could do that.

I happen to agree with you but I would tend to use ironic statements instead:

I can blow my nose with paper money.  So it has "intrinsic value".  I look at people who would waste gold on making jewlery and find it is rather analogous.  Copper is much more useful than paper, but the same weight of paper in paper money is considered more valuable.  Miners for some reason do not want to accept $200 in pennies for a bitcion.

But the next time someone says gold has intrinsic value therefore worth more, offer that five cents in pennies should be considered worth more than a hundred dollar bill by the same argument.  Dollars, Euros, bitcoin, they are all tokens in a monetary system.

What gives bitcoin more value over say, its many other altcoins?  It is all of the people who decide to back it.  It ironically is the most light weight cryptocurrency because there are many spv-wallets, whereas often altcoins only have Satoshi clients.

sdp

You are both basically correct, and I love it when people use the word intrinsic correctly. You can find intrinsic value in most everything, like you said with blowing your nose with a fiat bill. We know that gold has intrinsic value, because it has been used to make beautiful things, it is easy to form and it is in fact shiny. What we don't know, and cannot know, is the extent of the intrinsic value compared to the total value. With the bills, we can know that the intrinsic value is small, because you can use cheaper stuff to blow your nose. It is so small that the most correct thing is to disregard it completely, and say that fiat money has no intrinsic value. The same goes for bitcoin.

There is a problematic point with fiat for example used to light up your cigar - destruction of value just to show that you can afford it, to display your wealth. The same with gold, you don't have to destroy it, albeit that is also possible, as people eat leaf gold sometimes. With bitcoin it is also possible to show off, you can flash your phone's wallet, or even better, you can sign a message with the key of a large wallet, as Loaded did. None of this is in my opinion intrinsic value, but maybe we can invent a new word for the concept: Meta-value, the value of displaying value.

You say intrinsic value as gold have, does not make it better money. I agree, in fact I think the money is better without intrinsic value, and I like to call that pure money. But in saying so, we disagree with Aristoteles and Mises, both reputable and well known persons. I think they were wrong, good money does not have to have intrinsic value. To excuse the old masters, it can be said that money with no intrinsic value in fact was impossible at the time. The general population at the time would never prefer a written note or a copper token coin to gold, so it would be impossible. Then and now, it is the traders who define, with their preference, what is the best money.

A contemporary gold bug says that gold is better because gold has intrinsic value. Bitcoin is nothing because it lacks intrinsic value. They are wrong, and this is the crux of the discussion. The gold bugs will have to come over, and they will.  






Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
April 05, 2015, 11:20:14 PM
 #22493


 But in this thread, which is the center of bitcoin knowledge,


are you on crack? sane people occasionally pop in here, but mostly it's a troll thread for self-deluding old scatterbrains

Not a crack user. This thread, compared to the IMF website, that of Bank of England, New York Times blogs, Forbes, Coindesk... they are all inferior to this thread in knowledge about money. Have you read those sites? I wonder, they all ramble about the virtue of central control, the evil of anonymity, confusion about intrinsic value (I mean confusion as in total confusion), why money has value, not to mention all the non-knowledge of cryptograpy and computer security they put forward, unchallenged. If you want to know about money, fiat, gold and bitcoin, how they work and why, come here.

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 06, 2015, 01:43:55 AM
 #22494


 But in this thread, which is the center of bitcoin knowledge,


are you on crack? sane people occasionally pop in here, but mostly it's a troll thread for self-deluding old scatterbrains

uh huh.  declared by a 2 wk newbie account trying to hold back the avalanche.
Last of the V8s
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


Be a bank


View Profile
April 06, 2015, 07:43:54 AM
 #22495

Yes Erdogan those fiat/statist sites and one scam-infused 'coin' site obviously spout nonsense.
But your original claim was about bitcoin knowledge, not gold/money/fiat/old hat knowledge, and mine is that it is better found elsewhere.

Yes op it was stupid of me to make an account on bitcointalk and to attempt to engage your tsunami of trolls.

I do not accept segwit outputs as payment, nor send them.
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826


View Profile
April 06, 2015, 11:25:58 AM
 #22496

Yes Erdogan those fiat/statist sites and one scam-infused 'coin' site obviously spout nonsense.
But your original claim was about bitcoin knowledge, not gold/money/fiat/old hat knowledge, and mine is that it is better found elsewhere.

Yes op it was stupid of me to make an account on bitcointalk and to attempt to engage your tsunami of trolls.

I don't mind other opinions, but they are better with arguments. If there are good sites, there must be, the internet is big, I want to know about them. By the way, I like zero hedge, because a small percentage of posts there are non-confused, and david stockmans site.

 

sporket
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280



View Profile
April 06, 2015, 12:37:00 PM
 #22497

...This thread, compared to the IMF website, that of Bank of England, New York Times blogs, Forbes, Coindesk... they are all inferior to this thread in knowledge about money. ...

cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 06, 2015, 01:57:15 PM
 #22498

Yes Erdogan those fiat/statist sites and one scam-infused 'coin' site obviously spout nonsense.
But your original claim was about bitcoin knowledge, not gold/money/fiat/old hat knowledge, and mine is that it is better found elsewhere.

Yes op it was stupid of me to make an account on bitcointalk and to attempt to engage your tsunami of trolls.

Yes, you are stupid because you come in here with a 2wk account with no arguments, simply accusations. You couldn't possibly have been following this thread for any length of time to know what you're talking about nor form any valid  opinions of the people here so yes, you won't  get any respect because you haven't earned any.
inca
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


View Profile
April 06, 2015, 02:03:48 PM
 #22499

Yes Erdogan those fiat/statist sites and one scam-infused 'coin' site obviously spout nonsense.
But your original claim was about bitcoin knowledge, not gold/money/fiat/old hat knowledge, and mine is that it is better found elsewhere.

Yes op it was stupid of me to make an account on bitcointalk and to attempt to engage your tsunami of trolls.

Yes, you are stupid because you come in here with a 2wk account with no arguments, simply accusations. You couldn't possibly have been following this thread for any length of time to know what you're talking about nor form any valid  opinions of the people here so yes, you won't  get any respect because you haven't earned any.

It is an NLC alt.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
April 06, 2015, 02:17:56 PM
 #22500

Yes Erdogan those fiat/statist sites and one scam-infused 'coin' site obviously spout nonsense.
But your original claim was about bitcoin knowledge, not gold/money/fiat/old hat knowledge, and mine is that it is better found elsewhere.

Yes op it was stupid of me to make an account on bitcointalk and to attempt to engage your tsunami of trolls.

Yes, you are stupid because you come in here with a 2wk account with no arguments, simply accusations. You couldn't possibly have been following this thread for any length of time to know what you're talking about nor form any valid  opinions of the people here so yes, you won't  get any respect because you haven't earned any.

It is an NLC alt.

given that sporket likes images also, i'd assume his is an alt as well?
Pages: « 1 ... 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 [1125] 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 ... 1558 »
  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!