Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[vokain]

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

it may work being convertible in pm at a fixed rate as fiat money used to be once upon a time.
it just takes an alt.coin easily convertible in pm. Anyone can do it. But yes, it would require trust in a third party for the "backing"/conversion-thing.
and now trust is rightly becoming a rare commodity.

Figured I should cross-reference this since it's probably interesting, relevant reading and a source of thought exercises for you guys:

[...]

The most important feature of MasterCoins is the built-in support for users to create their own
currencies out of existing MasterCoins. For the purposes of demonstrating how user currencies will
work, we will use an example currency called “GoldCoins”, which are intended to track the value of one
ounce of gold, and which may be stored, transferred, bought, and sold similarly to MasterCoins.
Stability Concept
So how do we drive the value of these GoldCoins to their target value, when demand for them may
surge and decline? The price of GoldCoins is decided by the balance of supply and demand. Since we
can’t control the demand for GoldCoins, we must control the supply. The key to accomplishing this is to
use an escrow fund which holds MasterCoins

The escrow fund operates like a battery on the power grid, charging when there is excess energy then
discharging where there isn't enough. When there are too few GoldCoins (GoldCoin price is too high),
the escrow fund releases new GoldCoins, and the escrow-battery “charges” by holding MasterCoins in
escrow. When there are too many GoldCoins (GoldCoin price is too low), the escrow fund purchases
some of the excess GoldCoins, thereby “discharging” the escrow-battery as it releases the stored
MasterCoins.

Can you tell me how you could create an escrow with a coin which isn't backed by anything of value? Mastercoins are backed by Bitcoins but not only by Bitcoins. The value of the Mastercoins allow you to create an escrow and to my understanding the whole system works around that, I don't even know if you can do it if it were free. [this particular excerpt is in reference to a question as to why coloredcoin can't do this just as well]

[...]

[1714097997]

1714097997

[1714097997]

1714097997

[1714097997]

1714097997

[1714097997]

1714097997

[conspirosphere.tk]

Figured I should cross-reference this since it's probably interesting, relevant reading and a source of thought exercises for you guys:

[...]

The most important feature of MasterCoins is the built-in support for users to create their own
currencies out of existing MasterCoins. For the purposes of demonstrating how user currencies will
work, we will use an example currency called “GoldCoins”, which are intended to track the value of one
ounce of gold, and which may be stored, transferred, bought, and sold similarly to MasterCoins.
Stability Concept [...]

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

[vokain]

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

so you still have to trust the issuer? how do you remove that element? I suppose there are things present-day ETF issuers can do further to be transparent, but in the end there's still room for breaching trust, no? I don't see how this would be different.

[ekiro]

very good sign IMO.

Edit : this thread is an extension of this beast:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35956.msg443129#msg443129

Could people simply be getting rid of gold to buy BTC? It's. Great way to go from a physical asset to a virtual one you can redeem anywhere on the planet

[conspirosphere.tk]

An easier and more transparent way would be to launch an alt.coin, even with centralized mining, at a fixed rate with gold, and actually convertible trough ATM-like machines. So to increase the money supply the issuer would have to increase his gold stock and vice versa.
The utility for users could be liquidity, transferibility, etc. compared to phyzz.

so you still have to trust the issuer? how do you remove that element? I suppose there are things present-day ETF issuers can do further to be transparent, but in the end there's still room for breaching trust, no? I don't see how this would be different.

the difference would be that the day the ATM stop working, you know that you're phucked, not like losing 98% of purchasing power in 100 years.  

...and the ATM may even exchange in 2-way mode, so making the system almost p2p

[rocks]

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds.  People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything.  It's human nature.  

"But who created the universe"  ->  Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" ->  Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users.  A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?"  Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

[wachtwoord]

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds.  People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything.  It's human nature.  

"But who created the universe"  ->  Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" ->  Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users.  A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?"  Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

BUT, various people can each own the same Bitcoin at the same time (just share your private key) and a number of people can own Bitcoin but only jointly (multi-sig). These things are not really possible with something physical such as gold.

[User705]

I think the proper word is "control" of bitcoin.  Ownership implies governmental permission.  So yes in that regard bitcoin is superior to gold.  In other ways inferior.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

[wachtwoord]

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

This is not indoctrination. Sadly this is fact. The states actually indoctrinate you to believe otherwise.

Land you "own" isn't really yours.

[User705]

Ownership implies governmental permission.

WTF? ... are people really this indoctrinated with the facist state these days?

You haven't thought this through.  Lots of buzz words though.  There is control and legal ownership.  Those are two distinct things.

[cypherdoc]

very good sign IMO.

Edit : this thread is an extension of this beast:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=35956.msg443129#msg443129

Could people simply be getting rid of gold to buy BTC? It's. Great way to go from a physical asset to a virtual one you can redeem anywhere on the planet

that's what i did.

and i'm sure alot of ppl are now doing it also.

[rocks]

The idea of "backing" blows people's minds.  People feel compelled to locate a persona behind anything and everything.  It's human nature.  

"But who created the universe"  ->  Must be a "God"
"But who 'backs' Bitcoin" ->  Must be a person, business, physical object (a yellow metal) or gov't entity.

If we had to place a persona behind Bitcoin, we'd probably say that it's "backed" by the people, or the users.  A more interesting question would then be "why is it backed by the users?"  Reason and Logic, which lead these users to believe that Bitcoin has intrinsic value as a technology.

Both Gold and Bitcoin are backed by the same entity, the free will of the people that choose to use them and the value the people place on them.

Gold is decentralized in the same manner as Bitcoin. If I have a piece of Gold in my possession, that piece of gold is out of the hands of any central system or government and fully in control by myself. Under a Gold currency system, gold is distributed and controlled by the hundreds of millions of people who each possess a piece of gold, not a central government. And it is these hundreds of millions of people who determine the real value of each unit of Gold. Similarly if I own the private keys to some Bitcoins, those Bitcoins are fully controlled by myself and out of the hands of any other entity.

Bitcoin shares more attributes with Gold than I think most people understand, but which will enable Bitcoin to reach some amazing heights. (Provided the network holds and there are no successful attacks)

BUT, various people can each own the same Bitcoin at the same time (just share your private key) and a number of people can own Bitcoin but only jointly (multi-sig). These things are not really possible with something physical such as gold.

You can have the same ownership / control with Gold as well. For example you could store it an account where multiple people are established as owners and who all are required to approve actions, or store it in a safe known only to a number of people where each person's individual key is required to open. This provides the same multi-owner control over Gold.

I agree it is easier to setup this situation with Bitcoin than Gold, but my point that both are decentralized systems because ownership is decentralized holds. It is this decentralized nature of ownership which made Gold such a strong form of money over history, and which will make bitcoin a strong form of money as well.

[justusranvier]

So far in 2013 alone, the US Dollar has lost 93% of its value compared to Bitcoin.

[HeliKopterBen]

So far in 2013 alone, the US Dollar has lost 93% of its value compared to Bitcoin.

Most all assets on earth have collapsed when compared to bitcoin thus far in 2013.

[dalexc]

Cliffs of thread?

[adamstgBit]

Cliffs of thread?

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[rpietila]

Land you "own" isn't really yours.

Could you tell, what is the difference in this regard, between:
- bitcoins
- gold
- land?

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Bitcoin enables such unimpeachable control over your money that the distinction between ownership and control goes away.

Owning gold implies you have the moral and/or legal right to control your money.
Owning bitcoin means YOU CONTROL YOUR MONEY. Period.

It's so incredibly and obviously superior in hindsight that people will look back and laugh that Bitcoin took so long to be adopted.

[molecular]

Bear in mind that in a better freer future with less financial facism or simply some locales, a system of provably gold-backed cryptocurrency, if it was ever allowed to flourish under rule of law, would probably give bitcoin a stiff run for its money, pun intended, dyodd, diversify, imho.

How would that even work? How to prove there's gold backing it? I don't see how to do this, at least not without "3rd party risk".

it may work being convertible in pm at a fixed rate as fiat money used to be once upon a time.
it just takes an alt.coin easily convertible in pm. Anyone can do it. But yes, it would require trust in a third party for the "backing"/conversion-thing.
and now trust is rightly becoming a rare commodity.

Well, one could easily do it by setting up a network of localized ripple gateways. There's already some silver currency on ripple, probably also gold. To make it big and work one just needs to cover the globe with trusted physical gateways (gold shops might be a good option).

So yeah, I guess it can work, but it's not as trustless as pure crypto and it seems quite fragile to me. Who's to prevent the governments or foreign military to raid the storage facilities, for example.