What peer?
The common Internet commentator with the pretense of an education in the subject. The difference being that this one actually knows Bitcoin pretty well, although his economic credentials could be in question; and you don’t understand Bitcoin while your economic credentials are still in question.
So he’s not really a peer than.
I probably know alot more about it’s technological makeup then you give me credit for. I’m not so well informed in the politics behind it’s movement though. In either case neither are relevant.
It seem’s to me that you are mistaking and discounting a lot of the people here as mere Internet commentator’s with no background whatsoever that would validate our commentary. Why is it that you are here if you obviously feel this way? If you view us as such, then wouldn’t it be normal to go about your business and take advantage of the situation that you obviously believe you have with being already involved with Bitcoin?
From reading your posting here, it seem’s to me you are trying to convinve yourself moreso than the rest of us.
Just to add, I have no peer’s here or otherwise on the Internet in places that you would be able to read their opinion without paying them.
BTW, I know Bitcoin very well. I took the time to look at the source code, and I recognized a lot of Bit-Torrent 1.6 code in there. Beg’s the question of why BT and uTorrent, which infinitely more secure. Oh I know why, because it’s too hard to track the transaction’s and the creator really isn’t worried about security so much as record keeping…
That bring’s me to wonder who these people that wrote this actually are. I would be more concerned about intent than accepting something of this nature as anything more than a scam.
LOL! You must be projecting. I’ve made little effort to convince this crowd of anything. Everyone here seems set in their mode of thinking, whether they agree with myself or not. Perhaps that’s also true with myself. Everyone believes they are the rational ones. I’ve read this forum off & on for years, due to an outsized interest in praxeology, and I’m consistantly impressed with the lack of insight considering that this is a forum that is supposedly intended to allow Austrian minded people to comfortablely communicate. Apparently there exists a wide understanding about what Austrian Economic Theories actually mean.
This may be so, and it may be so for anyone else, but I have no evidence of this. For all that I know, you are a 13 year old kid pretending to be an educated adult; like half of the forum members on all of the forums that I’ve ever participated in.
There is no bitttorrent code in Bitcoin, although there is some that is very similar. That is only related to how the nodes connect to one another, and how they share information about other peers. The two techs are very different beyond the p2p protocol level.
And if bitcoin is a scam, I’m going to lose a fortune. Feel free to sit out, however. I’m not interested in trying to convince you of anything.
That’s odd, you are the one saying that Bitcoin is worth something, and advocating it here. Then you deny your effot’s in that statement.
No one here is set in anything except in using the Austrian method. Belief’s are not rational, as they are based on assumption and pre-conceived notion’s of morality. You have mistaken this forum for a conduit of Austrian’s. Most of the people are here to learn about the Austrian Method. The few that are not are either fully able to understand it, or simply have no real tangible interest in the subject. You appear to be the latter.
The entire hashing and porting method used is Bit-Torrent, they wouldn’t look familiar because the convention’s are different and they are written in different languages. I would venture to say you don’t know the Bit-Torrent technology very well with that statement.
You can’t lose something that you never had, and why are you worried about losing blip’s on a computer, it’s not as if you can actually go buy something you need with them. Unless they are taking Bitcoin’s for egg’s and milk where it is that you live at. I have no problem using gold and silver for those both.
Normally I’m a prick here, but for you I will make a special comment.
You are such a contradiction onto yourself. You make blinding statement’s filled with pseudo-intellectualism, and try to convince the people here that you actually know what you are talking about. You use this same methodology to try and portray yourself as being friendly with us while casually insulting us and throwing Ad-Hom’s in a very passive aggressive method. Make no mistake Moonbat, you are not on the same level as the core group here. I know if I can see through your posting here that in reality you are another Mercantilist Pig, that the rest of the core group can as well.
Enjoy trying to scam people out of their hard earned wages for worthless blip’s that you created out thin air. I will alway’s be on the other side telling people that they should stay away from it.
You see unlike the rest of the Austrian’s here, I have no moral qualm’s about speaking in a straight forward manner and being honest. Like I said, I have no peers on the Internet that you wouldn’t have to pay to speak with. Even though I believe we already had this discussion on Youtube already.
It’s a provable fact that bitcoins are “worth something” at any given time. That’s not the same as advocacy, nor is pointing out errors of fact, which I have also done.
That’s not how I see it, but you have a right to your own opinion, however wrong you might be.
Perhaps, perhaps not. I think that it’s more likely that you see similarities in how the p2p network works, and see things that are not there.
I’ve bought many differnet things online with bitcoin, from several differnet handmade items from Etsy vendors to computer hardware. I’ve never personally bought food with bitcoin, but it’s been done by others and remains possible if you wish to pay the cost of shipping. I believe there is a website dedicated to it called bitcoinmunchies.com (or something like that). Still, bitcoin isn’t designed to compete with cash; it’s designed to compete with Paypal. Have you ever bought milk with your paypal account?
Noooo!
You have mistaken me for someone else. I have never posted anything on youtube, I wouldn’t even know how. As for “always be on the other side”; well, have fun with that.
The only fact about them that is provable is that certain small group’s of maybe a few hundred people in the world have taken it upon themselves to assign value to Bitcoin’s. Just like anything in the market it’s based on auction’s, however the difference is that when the computer’s are shut-down or left at home, they are worthless. It’s a limited end user currency that is utterly worthless for everyday living without being propped up with the Fiat. This is the distinct you are missing.
Of course you wouldn’t, that would be counter to your own self-interest. I guess you missed that part of the Austrian Method. That’s what makes you a Mercantilist. You know better, but are willingly promoting a scam to benefit yourself.
Yes, I know all about what’s available with it. DId you really think that no one would look into the topic before pointing out much of a scam it is? You aren’t buying anything of any worth. When you can buy something other than end-user item’s then you might have a chance with it.
Uhh, Paypal uses Fiat currency. As in it uses cash, so Bitcoin is competing with cash, in fact it’s made on top of cash. It’s merely a further abstraction of currency away from real money built on top of another currency abstraction. It’s a convoluted mess of delusional grandeur.
This is even better, you claim to understand the technology, but you don’t even know how to post a video on Youtube? So which is it? Do you understand Javascript, or not? What about Perl? PHP?
The other side as in I have the farm land and the food that some fool will try to convince me to sell for bitcoin’s. I think I will take the government sanctioned currency so I can at least cover the taxes and buy gold and silver with it.
I didn’t miss that distinction, I just consider that a temporary condition. And I can use bitcoin anywhere that my phone can get a signal, which is just about anywhere I go.
{sigh} Okay, I’m a jerk. Whatever dude.
Wait, end user consumer products don’t have any worth?
I’m sure I could figure out how to post on youtube with the right motivation. After all, how difficulty could it be? You did it, right? I’ve just never had a reason to do so.
And you consider me part of a scam?
Clayton,
I think you are missing the obvious. Let me requote Lew Rockwell:
Just imagine what would happen if legal tender laws were repealed and the government stopped intervention in the market for money. Virtually overnight, we would see the appearance of hundreds if not thousands of new payment systems and alternative monies online. Merchants would be free to accept any means of payment.
The obvious thing is: legal tender laws and government meddling in money are not going away anytime soon. Until that happens (or a better competitor arises), bitcoin has comparative advantages against both fiat and gold. Whether Austrians call it “money” or not is irrelevant to the question of how many people are going to use it, and what the market value will be.
It is irrelevent to it’s use factor. It may indeed be widely used as a legitimate laundering mechanism but thats besides the point. As far as economic discussion is concerned, determining exchange ratio’s and analyzing historical exchange ratio’s (Prices) it becomes very relevant whether BTC is a money or not. You would be mis-informing people, in fact frauding them, if you lied to them and told them that BTC’s had a historical exchange ratio establishing todays stable prices(which it does not).
That this thread is still going on the same argument still after how many pages is ridiculous. Bitcoin fail’s the one test that makes money money, it’s not Fungible. One Bitcoin online is not worth the same as a Bitcoin in the real world.
USD and Gold have that distinction.
Bitcoin is nothing more than a ridiculous scam. The people that would prop it up on any other pretense than to launder money are either supporting the idea of direct democracy, and thusly socialism, or just in denial of what Bitcoin really is. It’s fitting that an open source advocate would come up with the idea as well. Anyone that would take Bitcoin is even more foolish than the idea of using cotton paper blend’s as currency backed by nothing. At least the paper blend’s are enforced by the threat of force, so the obligation is there if you don’t want to end up being taken against your will and placed in cage for such a silly notiong as committing fraud against a mere idea of a concept.
Human’s are depraved, and Bitcoin is just more evidence of it. I don’t care about being nice. I only care about being rational, and Bitcoin is about as rational as pouring a bottle of Johnny Walker Blue Label into a bowl to clean engine parts with it. Certainly not rational, and definately not cost effective.
It is also unlikely, since Bitcoin is pseudonymous rather than anonymous.
I do not understand what the analysis of historical prices has with the question whether BTC is a money or not. Indeed, praxeology is not about historical data but about deduction. I also do not understand why the question whether BTC is money is relevant at all. If governments attack money, logically it will be replaced by non-money. Objecting to this is like objecting to the existence of tax advisors.
This is already way off topic (also incorrect). Please make yourself familiar with the treatment of lies and fraud by Austrians. I recommend Block and Kinsella.
Since I don’t see anyone claiming BTC’s prices are “stable”, the argument makes no sense.
Maybe you should spend a bit more time on producing a response as I can’t find much meaningful in this one.
NidStyles,
I believe to have successfully argued that the question whether Bitcoin is money or not is insufficient to determine its success or demise, as other questions take precedence. See for example my posts here: http://blog.mises.org/17249/ideological-and-irrational-exuberance/
However, your post is emotional rather than rational.
You must not be aware of what money is. Money is an object which holds the highest degree of historical data, a collection of exchange ratio’s observed in the past. Exchange ratio’s are prices, again, observed in the past. Prices(Exchange Ratio’s) are a fundamental tenant that a money must have before it really becomes a “money”. This is all explained in the regression theorum, a topic you and others have willingly, and covneniently, decided to ignore.
Any money that has no historical data reference IE prices, is no money at all. Currently BTC is a dollar proxy, it does not establish it’s own exchange ratio. That may change in the future but for reasons I’ve already explained it’s not likely that BTC will experience large enough adoptation to develop the volume of exchange ratio’s necessary for BTC to be consided a legitmate money. People have no reason to hold BTC’s beyond it’s usefulness as a money, and since all it can be used for is a money, people have no real reason to hold BTC’s all in it’s current state.
Not incorrect and very relevant. I wager this point flew right over your head. Perhaps since you don’t know what money is I could see why you would get confused here. The irony here is your telling me to make myself familiar with Austrian Economics. This coming from someone who has no idea what the Austrian Insight of money is. An insight created by the school of thoughts originating members(Menger / Mises). And if your confused about what I stated, why does that invite such an antogonistic response from you?
I’ve have given the Bitcoin proponents more time then they deserve on this particular post. In fact if you had read the first 30 pages you would have seen that. Just because your too lazy to go back and read the past 30 pages of more isightful posts I 've left doesn’t mean you get to accuse me of being lazy here.
Also I’m not goign to teach you 200 years of key austrian insight over a web forum. Go do your own homework. Especially before you start accusing other people of not being famliar.
[EDIT]
Edited my first paragraph response to make mroe sense. Distinguishing the difference between money and prices, and how the two are related. But honestly Peter your not being fair if you expect me to invest several hours more of my time trying to educate you and others. Everything that needs to be said has already been said 25-30 pages ago. Give me at least a little credit, and a little bit of slack, and go read my previous posts.
Filc:
I already said that the question of money is not relevant with regards to the argument I’m making and explained why. I never made the argument that Bitcoin is money. Therefore, your argument is circular: it is only relevant if the concept of money is relevant for Bitcoin in the fist place.
The rest of your post is just a repetition of this circular argument, plus ad hominems and appeal to authority. Your reaction is emotional rather than rational.
In that case what exactly is your argument? And what does it have to do with mine? It sounds as if my argument has nothing to do with you, yet you responded to me as it if does.
Didn’t you just make this very same statement about someone else earlier? So anyone who doesn’t agree with you is emotionally unstable? Furthermore, where exactly is the circularity. I’ll admit I am repeating myself in summary but what else do you want me to do? Change my position to a false one?
Can you point out where the circularity exists in the Misesian/Mengerian regression theorum? Such a critique was already addressed by Mises, are you familiar with it?
In short.
A) There is no appeal to authority. I am not saying the regression theorum is right simply because Mises says so. I am saying it’s right because it’s logically coherent and sound. Mises just explains it better then I is all.
B) There is no circularity. (Already addressed in the theorum itself)
C) If my position has integrity, and I am forced to repeat myself, that isn’t in and of itself a bad thing.
D) What emotional appeal are you talking about? The only one who here who seems to be off in left field as far as rationality is you. You have no argument, your nitpicking, and it sounds more like your trying to pick an internet knowledge fight more than anything else.
E) What Ad Hominem?
Do you ever post anything concrete? The above post is one notch above trolling. You make accusations without backing any of them up. I am fairly confused as to where your trying to take this Peter.
filc,
once again, slowly.
My argument was posted above, as a reaction to Clayton. You initiated a debate with me by responding to it, apparently without reading it. Now you are confused.
I did not claim that Bitcoin is money. So by bringing up the regression theorem and referring to Austrians who wrote about money you are committing the straw man fallacy and making a circular argument.
Since you obviously neither read my post nor the link I posted, let me repost my argument in a compact form: if states are on a crusade against “money” (regardless of what that means), e.g. by legal tender laws, or by raiding the premises of providers of “money”, that creates a market gap and that will logically be filled by “non-money”. Assuming that gold is “money”, then Bitcoin is an example of such “non-money” filling a market gap.
Ill admit that I mis-understood your point(If that is indeed the case, I’m too lazy to go back and look). If you admit that the entire point of this whole thread has been what is and is not money. That is after all what at least 20 pages of this thread was about and the title discusses “Currency” where the definition of money is necessarily relevant.
In other words try starting another thread next time for clarity sake.
Also keep the “your emotionally unstable” nonesense out of your posts. It makes it seem as if you have no real meat to offer other then a condenscending tone to folks who don’t deserve it.
Based on your tone alone I see no reason why anyone should waste time reading your posts.
For the record I’ve yet to see anyone “refute” or even “Address” Clayton’s posts correctly.
filc,
if anything, it’s some of the Austrians who object to Bitcoin that usually attempt to bring up the topic of money although the other party never mentions it. Bitcoin does not fit either into the Austrian definition of money nor fiat. A proper scientist would recognise that and start analysing it using other available tools.
This thread is about Bitcoin, not about money. It is you who should start another thread if you want to talk about money. Second of all, I’d like to point out that I merely reacted to one of the existing posts and pointed the error in it (it was making invalid assumptions). You went on a rampage how Bitcoin is a fraud, failed to provide any argument whatsoever, and then when you were explicitly confronted with my actual argument, instead of addressing it you started metaarguing.
Are you going to address my argument or not?