Nobel Prize-Winning Economist Says Bitcoin 'Ought to be Outlawed' (cnn.com) 461
Bitcoin "is drawing harsh criticism from Wall Street investment firms," writes Slashdot reader rmdingler -- and even from some prominent economists. CNN reports:
The harshest assessment came from Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, who said that bitcoin "ought to be outlawed. Bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention," he told Bloomberg TV. "It doesn't serve any socially useful function." Robert Shiller, who won a Nobel for his work on bubbles, said the currency appeals to some investors because it has an "anti-government, anti-regulation feel. It's such a wonderful story," he said at a conference in Lithuania, according to Bloomberg. "If it were only true."
Wall Street titans were getting in on the action, too. Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud." Billionaire investor Carl Icahn said on CNBC that it "seems like a bubble." The digital currency previously attracted the derision of JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon, who called it a "fraud" that would "eventually blow up." Warren Buffett has warned of a "real bubble."
Wednesday the price of bitcoin shot past $11,000 -- just ten days after rising past $8,000.
Wall Street titans were getting in on the action, too. Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud." Billionaire investor Carl Icahn said on CNBC that it "seems like a bubble." The digital currency previously attracted the derision of JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon, who called it a "fraud" that would "eventually blow up." Warren Buffett has warned of a "real bubble."
Wednesday the price of bitcoin shot past $11,000 -- just ten days after rising past $8,000.
I see (Score:5, Insightful)
" Bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention,"
Like cash?
Re:I see (Score:4, Insightful)
"potential for circumvention,"
Theft by fiat currency devaluation.
When it happens to them, it's asset impairment/taking a haircut on the investment.
When it's you, it's a good thing for the economy that we've reduced the value of your 401k. Expanding the money supply, quantitative easing, TARP - you should feel good about having your saving stolen. Why, anyone who seeks to protect their wealth is almost committing a crime - like 'circumvention', say.
Re: I see (Score:2, Insightful)
Theft by fiat currency devaluation.
When it happens to them, it's asset impairment/taking a haircut on the investment.
When it's you, it's a good thing for the economy that we've reduced the value of your 401k. Expanding the money supply, quantitative easing, TARP - you should feel good about having your saving stolen. Why, anyone who seeks to protect their wealth is almost committing a crime - like 'circumvention', say.
Are you on drugs?
Does your 401(k) invest in cash? You really should get a clue and diversify.
The only people hurt by currency devaluation are those who hoard currency. Which is basically nobody. Normal people invest in assets other than cash.
Re: I see (Score:5, Informative)
The way I see it, you're getting very worked up about one of the smallest problems with our economic system. BTC and other cryptocurrencies alone present a much larger problem, which is massively enabling criminal finance. To the working class, losses via currency devaluation are a barely noticeable speck compared to wage theft, sub-livable wages, high prices due to oligopolistic market activity, and runaway inequality.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"It doesn't serve any socially useful function."
Except to allow society to conduct direct sale without outside meddling. What next? Outlawing direct trade? Even yard sale items have to go through government escrow?
I think this guy is just angry because he missed the boat. Or he's out of touch. Or both.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You cannot celebrate the absurd valuations BTC has right now
Market cap is $200 billion. The market cap for gold is $7 trillion. Bitcoin is easier to trade, has proof of authenticity and can be arbitrarily divided and combined. One could argue that it should be more valuable than gold.
If you think current valuation is absurd, what should the price be ? And using the same logic what's a reasonable price for gold ?
Re: (Score:3)
What's the largest denomination?
How thick is $10,000 in that denomination?
Can you mail (let alone email) an inch thick of 100 dollar bills?
And that's a small amount.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cash should be outlawed too.
If the government can't control it, it should not exist
If it were outlawed, governments couldn't merely print more of it in order to sustain its false value.
No way in hell is that gonna happen.
Besides, the US Government still mints pennies at a loss. They would continue to print dollars for the same stupid reason.
Re:I see (Score:5, Interesting)
The times that governments printed money to 'sustain its false value' are long over.
Money is now moved into the economy via credits etc.
Re: I see (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I see (Score:5, Insightful)
Cash probably would be outlawed, if governments themselves didn't need to conduct untraceable transactions. Unless you think we ship pallets of cash to third world countries because we can't figure out how to give people bank accounts and wire transfers.
Re: I see (Score:2, Troll)
I would love to see you trying to educate an Afghan elder in some isolated mountain village about how to use his brand new MasterCard. Should be good for weeks of entertainment!
Re: I see (Score:5, Interesting)
I would love to see you trying to educate an Afghan elder in some isolated mountain village about how to use his brand new MasterCard. Should be good for weeks of entertainment!
A MasterCard would be stupid yes, but not a mobile SMS pay system used to pay government employees as well as rural transactions, such as a tribal elder would use. [techcrunch.com]
Re: (Score:3)
If you believe that Afghanistan is the only country where we send hard currency, or that bribing villagers with micropayments is the only use of cash, you're sorely mistaken.
Re:I see (Score:5, Insightful)
and what real value do you think bitcoin has?
It's the ultimate "fiat currency", created by wasting enormous amounts of electricity to produce absolutely nothing of any value in the physical world.
and then speculated on by gamblers and wanna-be finance-industry scammers (playing kiddie versions of the same scams in their bitcoin sandpit just like the big boys on wall st) to inflate it's non-value to completely ludicrous prices.
and the funniest/worst of it is that even though it's the ultimate fiat currency, it's not actually a currency at all, and barely even pretends to be one. It's a greater fool gamble that the purchaser can offload their worthless gimmicks for an even greater price than they paid for it to someone even dumber than them.
It's digital fucking tulips - something that has little or no actual value, but an over-inflating price just because people think they can buy it at any price and sell it on for more...and as long as they're not the ones holding onto the worthless shit when the bubble inevitably bursts, that's totally OK. Because they're too smart to be those final suckers, right?
you dumb, brainwashed and over-propagandised yanks need to stop blaming government for fucking everything and start blaming the corporations who stole your government from you decades ago...and start thinking "cui bono" from your country being turned into a shithole and following the fucking money.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
and what real value do you think bitcoin has?
Bitcoin has the same real value as U.S. Dollars: none! The dollar is no longer guaranteed by anything, not gold, nor silver, nor land, nor oil reserves, or anything else. Thus, we need to judge its value on other criteria, not real value. Things such as trust, or scarcity. If the value or your currency lost 98% of its value, would it still be scarce? If you don't trust the people in charge of the currency, why should they be in charge of the currency?
It's the ultimate "fiat currency", created by wasting enormous amounts of electricity to produce absolutely nothing of any value in the physical world.
Electricity consumption ensures that it cannot be created
Re: I see (Score:3, Insightful)
You're wrong. The dollar has legal standing as recognized tender for all debts public or private.
You pay someone in bitcoin and they can take it and say you paid them in Monopoly money and they want cash now.
And you have no legal recourse except give the shit back or pay again.
Re:I see (Score:5, Insightful)
The dollar is no longer guaranteed by anything, not gold, nor silver, nor land, nor oil reserves, or anything else. Thus, we need to judge its value on other criteria, not real value. Things such as trust, or scarcity.
Its value is guaranteed by the legal requirement that it must be accepted to pay off previous debts.
When I agree to a finance contract to purchase a car, they're agreeing to accept my $280 per month for the duration of the loan, even if $280 no longer buys a burrito at Taco Bell. Funny thing is, this "trust" major financial institutions have in the dollar leads to another trait Bitcoin sorely lacks: stability.
Electricity consumption ensures that it cannot be created without cost, thereby preventing anyone from artificially increasing the supply.
No. Bitcoin's scarcity hinges on the fact that the bulk of the miners all agree on which version of the Bitcoin software is the "one true Bitcoin". Anyone can easily modify the software to spew out coins galore, or change a few parameters they didn't like - and people have (Bitcoin cash, anyone?). There's only one rule in the game of cryptocoins: mob rule.
Once again, bitcoin is in no way inferior other currencies, and you must look to other measures to determine its worth. The concept that bitcoin seems impossible to debase makes it considerably desirable.
No way inferior? Try buying anything with it without jumping through a bunch of hoops, and losing some of it due to transaction fees and value fluctuations.
Maybe if you're trying to fund ransomware (or other illegal activities) with it, it's an easier way to transfer money than traditional means - but for legitimate purposes, it's still a far bigger hassle than just using cash, your debit/credit card, Western Union, or PayPal.
Re: (Score:3)
No need to ban bitcoin, it is in the process of being destroyed by big money interests, they will of course be dumping it once they can push it high enough (balance between how much is spent driving it up and how fast it drops in value going down). Up, down, up, down, up down, sort of almost up and then down and out. I reckon they will managed at least three squeezing blood from a stone cycles, or with sufficient main stream media deceitful marketing up to five fully solid blood letting cycles, don't say yo
Re: I see (Score:3)
Actually the penny is not printed at a loss either. Sure the labor and materials to mint a penny cost more than one penny, but the value of a penny is not 1p. That's its value to you. But to the economy its value is the sum of every transaction it will ever be part off. And to the government its value us the tax on every person who receives it as income. Even for the penny that value is way more than the manufacturing cost
Re: (Score:3)
Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, where the supply of BTC can't expand to meet demand, are very much like Ponzi schemes. The people who get in first and do long-term speculation make out like bandits for not doing much of anything productive.
Re:I see (Score:5, Insightful)
What has happened to Bitcoin is the opposite of inflation. Because its money supply is now fixed, it has been driven out of circulation as a currency (Gresham's law) and has become a hoarded virtual commodity.
BTC is also outside the banking system, which means that you can't earn interest on it and the centuries of antifraud experience that banks have does not apply to Bitcoin trades. That is why exchanges are continually embezzling your coins and getting hacked.
Re:I see (Score:5, Insightful)
That is why exchanges are continually embezzling your coins and getting hacked.
In the end, Bitcoin is another funny money vehicle that will probably bubble and collapse just like the other bubbles of pretend money do.
Re: I see (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's backed by the people using it, just like any other currency. I've never seen anyone properly explain why that wouldn't be good enough for Bitcoin, but it is good enough for gold.
(Yes, I know, gold is used for industrial purposes. However, this does not explain why we must pay $1300 for an ounce of gold that takes about $500 to mine, while mining 10 times the amount we need, and already having stockpiled years worth of production)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's backed by the people using it, just like any other currency. I've never seen anyone properly explain why that wouldn't be good enough for Bitcoin, but it is good enough for gold.
Other than Silk Road and similar, it hasn't really been used much. It is backed by people investing in it, because they hope that someone else will buy it from them for a larger sum of real money than they bought it for themselves.
Re: I see (Score:5, Insightful)
No, they buy it because they believe it's currenmt price is lower than it's peak price. They hope and expect to sell it off somewhere just before that peak price. Then the bubble pops and people who held too long hold a fire sale.
I See (Score:5, Funny)
Whereas Goldman Sachs is a vehicle for what exactly?
Re:I See (Score:4, Insightful)
It's the same reason the US government gets upset when foreign governments spy on and try to manipulate and abuse the US population.
They resent competition.
The US government has over time become little different in basic behavior than street gangs that sell illegal drugs. Both will happily ignore legalities when convenient and quickly employ violence to defend their 'turf' to protect their illicit business preying on the general population.
At this point it's like the US is being run by the (D)rips and c(R)uds.
Strat
Re:I See (Score:4, Funny)
At this point it's like the US is being run by the (D)rips and c(R)uds.
And I thought it was the c(R)ips and bloo(D)s.
Re:I See (Score:5, Insightful)
Whereas Goldman Sachs is a vehicle for what exactly?
Goldman Sachs and the rest of that entire system is, to quote Adam Smith, a vehicle for perpetrating a "conspiracy against the public'. Bitcoin is a way of circumventing that system which is why the system feels threatened by it. I don't think there is a real way to kill Bitcoin or rather what it represents. I've heard people like Stiglitz try to argue against Bitcoin because it 'helps terrorists' or 'facilitates criminality' but so do cash and uncut diamonds, those excuses are just fig leaves. The real threat is that Bitcoin facilitates the circumvention of the established gate keepers of the financial system. Even if Goldman Sachs and the rest of that ilk get their bought politicians to kill Bitcoin people will find other forms of portable wealth and use it as a way to circumvent the established financial system and the harder Wall Street and the politicos try to block these circuitous routes the more motivated people will become to invent new ones.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not "fraud" when the people in power do it, you see.
Re:I See (Score:4, Interesting)
Whatever GS does is considered or will eventually be considered legal. There's a big difference, if the FBI comes knocking at your door, you're going to jail for a long time before you even get a trial, if the FBI comes knocking at their doors, they're going to make a press release and the laws change.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to be a company to do that, you can do it at home in your spare time [themagicwarehouse.com]!
Yes it's a scam, but it does have a purpose (Score:5, Interesting)
What we really need, of course, is a real government-backed digital currency. I can think of a few reasons why this hasn't been implemented yet, but it will happen eventually.
Re:Yes it's a scam, but it does have a purpose (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What is it backed by? Precious metals are rare enough plus they can be used for other purposes. Cash is backed by governments and banks. Stocks / bonds have value based on the worth of the company, cash flow and future earnings. All three of these are covered under financial laws. Are they perfect - certainly not since we've seen prices of metals fluctuate, currency manipulated, and stocks/bonds devalued by poor decisions.
Bitcoin is backed by nothing. Its only purpose is to avoid detection in order to
Re:Yes it's a scam, but it does have a purpose (Score:5, Insightful)
You really don't have a clue.
Try again [coinmap.org].
The value fluctuates wildly because it's being bought and sold by people, who don't always act logically. It crashed a bit after reaching $10K because a lot of people had sell orders for that price. It's already back up to $11K.
Not cash stored in computers. If someone attacked the country with EMP bombs, they'd wipe a lot of "regular cash" too.
Re:Yes it's a scam, but it does have a purpose (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it backed by? Precious metals are rare enough plus they can be used for other purposes.
Industrial use of rare metals is a distraction. Only 10% of the mined gold goes to industry. The rest is hoarded. Gold is also not accepted by most legitimate business establishments.
Plus the only people making any money are the ones who got in early. That's a pyramid scheme.
People who got in early on AAPL or MSFT also made a ton of money. Does that mean these are pyramid schemes ? No. People got in early because they understood how some cheap things have a great value.
Re:Yes it's a scam, but it does have a purpose (Score:4, Insightful)
> ding ding ding! Gold is also a fiat currency.
I don't think you quite understand what that term means... gold is a commodity currency.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't compare a stock like AAPL or MSFT to something like Bitcoin.
I wasn't trying to claim they are equivalent. I was merely pointing out that the early investor can make a disproportionate amount of profit on a growing asset, and that this property is not enough to call something a pyramid scheme.
Re: (Score:2)
Cost of Generation (Score:5, Informative)
As you know the distributed ledger and transaction mechanisms that provide the blockchain that underpins Bitcoin are derived from compute-intensive functions and are created through the process commonly known as "mining". When Bitcoin was originally introduced, the 'value' of a Bitcoin was set in such a way that it was worth slightly less than the cost of the electricity it would take to "mine the coin". [This was entirely intentional - had this not been done Bitcoin would have immediately suffered run-away "inflation"
However, Bitcoin also has a built-in scarcity model, in which the value given out for mining is being progressively reduced [in fact halved] as more coins are mined. Originally this was set to take place approximately once every four years or so, although with the amount of purpose-built ASICs now operating vast mining farms, it is entirely possible that the four year value has shortened somewhat. Each time the milestone is passed, the value of Bitcoins paid halves. I am not sure if this was done to forestall the effect that Moore's Law would have on mining or done specifically to provide a built-in scarcity value for the coins being mined.
So, in an attempt to answer your question, the "value" backing a coin was originated as the cost of producing it...
What has happened since then is that a raft of different speculators have piled in to Bitcoin and are now treating it like a commodity, not a currency. In other words, different rules apply. Now the driver of "value" to Bitcoin is driven by the perceived scarcity. In this sense the discussions relating to Bitcoin being a bubble are much closer to the market reaction in years past to treating classic cars or rare works of art in the same way. [ In those cases, the thinking was that since it simply wasn't possible to create "more" classic cars, so their scarcity value made them a trade-worthy commodity. This idea may well last for a time with Bitcoin, but - in exactly the same way was true for classic cars and works of art - if the "market" decides that it no longer has an interest in cryptocurrency, then the value will crash.
Detractors point to this and declare that this automatically means that Bitcoin is a fraud. However, it is important to note that we could say the same thing about a $100 bill, or a £100 note if you had one in your pocket. There is no way that the paper/polymers/ink/plastic that comprise the bill or note are worth the currency printed on them. The only reason they have that "value" is because an entire system - propped up by governments and banks - is willing to support them.
It hasn't happened for a long time - perhaps since the end of the Second World War - when we saw a total collapse in a major national economy. [ Although look at the currency in Zimbabwe for an example]. However, in the closing days of WWII, currencies such as the Chinese Yuan devalued so quickly that more money was being printed on recycled newspaper, and it took a wheelbarrow of currency [by volume] to buy a few vegetables. In this regard it would be ignorant and dangerous to argue that there are major differences between Bitcoin and other major fiat currencies.
Bit of a long-winded answer - sorry for that - but in essence the summary is: your question is irrelevant.
Re: Cost of Generation (Score:4, Interesting)
Now I have a nasty feeling that you're going to correct me and tell me that I'm wrong... ?
Re: (Score:2)
Once lost it cannot be recovered. At least cash can be found and used.
If everyone in (e.g.) the United States withdrew all the "cash" in their bank accounts, there would not be enough physical currency to cover them. The entire monetary system would collapse. In other words, there is more "virtual cash" than "physical cash" in existence.
Plus the only people making any money are the ones who got in early. That's a pyramid scheme.
Pretty much how the economy in general works nowadays. That's why all these fat cats at Goldman Sachs, etc. are upset: "How dare other people make shit-loads of money contributing nothing useful to the economy!? That's OUR thing!"
Obligatory Gandhi (Score:5, Insightful)
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - Mahatma Gandhi
We're at step #3 now.
Re:Obligatory Gandhi (Score:4, Insightful)
Financial markets will not "drop everything" to get into crypto-currencies. They'll simply add them to their lists.
Re: (Score:2)
Man.. You just had to bring up a Nazi reference didn't you... Usually that means you are losing the argument, but in this case I think you actually won the point. Well done there AC.
Wallstreet is upset (Score:3)
Upgrade/Fork (Score:2)
Neither do you. (Score:5, Insightful)
Neither do you, or just about anybody else brought up in this conversation.
Re: (Score:2)
A more useful response -- or at least one that I would have liked to see -- might've asked for a clearer definition of socially useful, or pointed to some socially useful things bitcoin does, or relied on the moderation system to silence the original overgeneral comment.
Sigh.
Then you should have logged in and made that response, rather than bellyaching that no one else did.
Perpetrating fraud you say? (Score:5, Insightful)
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud."
If anyone should know about perpetrating fraud, it would be Lloyd Blankfeind. And his buddy Jamie Dimon as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud."
If anyone should know about perpetrating fraud, it would be Lloyd Blankfeind. And his buddy Jamie Dimon as well.
Is your point that we shouldn't listen to him because he knows something about fraud, or that we should listen to him because he knows something about fraud?
In these days of howaboutism, is some times gets hard to tell!
Re: (Score:3)
We should listen to him, but always while keeping in mind that he's only trying to help himself, not us.
Re:Perpetrating fraud you say? (Score:5, Insightful)
We should listen to him, but always while keeping in mind that he's only trying to help himself, not us.
Never trust anyone with your money that doesn't lose when you lose.
The fraud being perpetrated. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The vast majority of interest in Bitcoin is from people hoping to make a quick buck riding the bubbl
Re: (Score:2)
Responsible central banks adjust the money supply to the size of the economy so that its value is relatively stable
Even if they keep the value stable, that doesn't mean the process is fair. Some guy in a suit goes bankrupt on a $10 billion loan, and the central bank adds another $10 billion to keep the money supply well adjusted. Sounds good, but the net effect is to take a little bit from everyone with a savings account, and deposit it in the pockets of a few.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not talk about unicorns while we're at it?
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: The fraud being perpetrated. (Score:2)
Let me ask you a simple question. Will you lend me a Bitcoin today for 6 months at $500? At the end of 6 months, I will return it to you and of course you keep the $500.
How about 1 month, 3 months, or a year? At which point will you say no?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The fraud that is being perpetrated is not Bitcoin but the fiat money cranked out by scammer governments that seem to think they can do anything they want to to the public, including ruin the concept of money itself.
All money since the beginning of money is fiat money. Whether it be gold, jewels, cowrie shells, or Yap stone Rai.
Although, I'd be curious if you had the examples of non-fiat money. If salt was rare, that might be a good choice. Something essential to life that we'll die if we don't have it is needed to be non-fiat. Fortunately or unfortunately, it is pretty common and easy to get these days.
pot kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud."
Well he would know...
JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon, who called it a "fraud"
Ditto
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein told Bloomberg that the currency serves as "a vehicle for perpetrating fraud."
Well he would know...
JPMorgan boss Jamie Dimon, who called it a "fraud"
Ditto
Your point? Agree that it is fraud because these experts call it fraud and avoid it, or invest like you're the third chimp trying to get on the ark, because this is experts in performing fraud talking?
Butthurt much (Score:2)
Potential of circumvention = protection of rights (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Potential of circumvention = protection of righ (Score:4, Interesting)
The amount of bitcoin being used as a currency is diminishingly small, the vast majority is being held by speculators.
If anyone is doubting this statement:
Bitcoin is stuck at less than 10 transactions per second. Total value of all bitcoins is somewhere close to 200 billion USD. This makes Bitcoin practically useless for actual transactions. The ratio of transaction capacity to value just isn't there -- it only works if most of the money sits still the vast majority of the time.
Wrong kind of artificial scarcity (Score:4, Insightful)
A good currency should do a few things:
- Have low "friction" in transactions (in terms of ease, time, and transaction costs)
- Be near-universal in acceptance
- Provide a good store of value
- Be difficult to counterfeit
Bitcoin does very well on the last point and, in some senses, also does well on the first point due to the fact that it is a digital currency.
These properties are generally achieved by currencies through some form of artificial scarcity. Gold, for example, is valued well above its utility in industry.
Bitcoins version of artificial scarcity is poisonous, in the sense that its mechanism invites society to waste resources (electricity, silicon chips) on generating scarce integers no one else has. The world will be far better off once we are using digital currencies with different forms of artificial scarcity.
I think it's hard to argue Bitcoin is treated much as a currency even now, except perhaps by the ransomware authors. Generally it is being purchased as an "investment", which lately bears similarity to some historical crazes and bubbles.
Re: (Score:2)
The world will be far better off once we are using digital currencies with different forms of artificial scarcity.
True, that would be the holy grail. The problem is designing a system that doesn't cost a bunch of effort to validate correct transactions, but would make it really hard to validate incorrect ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you bother to write all that and start with a blatant falsehood?
Bitcoin is horrible in terms of ease of use, transaction time, and transaction cost.
Re: (Score:3)
Depends what you're comparing it against. For same-country transactions? It's not as good as it used to be.
For sending value to someone in another country? It wins on transaction time and cost by a huge margin. And ease of use too because anyone with a computer/tablet/smartphone and an internet connection can set up its own wallet, no need for banks or similar.
Heck, even sending money from Canada to the USA, apart from credit cards or Paypal, is slow and expensive. And we're next to one another and really s
Re: Wrong kind of artificial scarcity (Score:2)
You forgot two points.
-easy replacement of destroyed units
-inflatable to forgive past mistakes.
The first is easy to understand I think. If someone runs away with their Bitcoins and dies at the bottom of the sea those coins should effectively be lost. The value would be spread across the remaining but there quickly comes a point of limit for a currency that is naturally limited in its units.
The second is a bit more difficult. An employee gets paid 2 coins today and 2 far into the future rather than 3 coins t
Re: (Score:2)
but there quickly comes a point of limit for a currency that is naturally limited in its units.
There is no limit to how far you can divide bitcoin, because we can always upgrade the protocol to support smaller units.
Basically being able to print and destroy currency allows you some flexibility to borrow from good times to patch the bad times; making the roller coaster less bumpy and stay on the rails.
Great. Let's keep fiat currencies for day to day life. And we'll use bitcoin for those people who want to save something up for later, and don't want to watch their wealth get inflated away. Much like gold, but with some added benefits that you can verify its authenticity, transfer it over the internet, and divide/combine it.
Not a Nobel Prize (Score:2)
This Guy Is Clearly A Retarded Hack (Score:2)
Thanks for the chuckles, Lloyd (Score:2)
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein daring to speak unironically about "perpetrating fraud" is probably the funniest thing I've read here today.
The biggest irony (Score:2)
is that this comes from a representative of a profession thatâ(TM)s ought to be outlawed due to itâ(TM)s lack of net positive contribution to humankind - an economist.
Contradiction (Score:5, Insightful)
Bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention," he told Bloomberg TV. "It doesn't serve any socially useful function."
Circumventing governments is a socially useful function. Virtually all modern governments have grown to be far too powerful. Bitcoin represents a small but important struggle against one, small aspect of this power. Likely it will be either squashed or (worse) absorbed, but...maybe not. There's also a vanishingly small chance that people will realize that modern governments need to be massively reduced in scale, focusing on the essential needs of their constituents, rather than the global fantasies of the elite.
Geez, that doesn't sound half bad. Maybe I should become a propaganda writer :-/
The government and corporations hate it (Score:2)
They hate a currency that they donâ(TM)t control that they canâ(TM)t monitor.
Re:The government and corporations hate it (Score:5, Insightful)
Slashdot really needs to either fix this apostrophe problem or at least convert the character to one it can display when we submit comments.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds too much like work.
Re: (Score:3)
Not one other site on the entire internet has this problem.
Banking?? (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
So (Score:3)
A number of crooks and criminal organisations want Bitcoin to "go away".
That sounds like the strongest possible reccomendation for the increased use of cryptocurrencies. The CIA, GS and the rest of the Wall Street Gang are thr prime causes of most problems in the world. If they had less control and influence, there would be fewer famines, war s etc.
Re:Bitcoin defines Valuation today. (Score:4, Insightful)
It happened several times already. But the hype pulls it right back up, and people love it, because on every crash, you buy em because you know the stupid hypers will pull it up again.
Re: (Score:2)
It happened several times already. But the hype pulls it right back up, and people love it, because on every crash, you buy em because you know the stupid hypers will pull it up again.
Reminds me of the old housing bubble. Amazing that people would sign up to lose everything, but humans do it again and again.
Re: why listen to obvious idiocy? (Score:2, Insightful)
In theory, no one should be stupid enough to fall for a pyramid scheme. In practice, people fall for them. Bitcoin is one.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Fuckin' capitalism. I hate that I'm one of the wealthiest people to have ever lived by a long shot, and I'm not even the wealthiest in my neighborhood. Fuckin system sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economics derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy. Among them is the Swedish human rights lawyer Peter Nobel, a great-grandson of Ludvig Nobel. Nobel criticizes the awarding institution of misusing his family's name, and states that no member of the Nobel family has ever had the intention of establishing a prize in economics. He explained that "
Re: There's no Nobel Prize for economics! (Score:3)
There's no Nobel Prize for economics. Go look it up.
I did, and you're wrong. While Alfred Nobel himself did not fund a prize in economics, the Nobel Foundation recognises it as a legitimate Nobel Prize, and candidates go through the same selection criteria and are assessed by a legitimate scientific institution.
Re: (Score:2)
Stupid troll gets an answer to his dumbass question in every bitcoin thread and yet keeps asking the same dumb fucking question in all the new bitcoin threads.
News at 11.
Re: (Score:3)
Forgot a relevant link:
https://www.thoughtco.com/effe... [thoughtco.com]