- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Winklevoss Twins Plan First Fund For Bitcoins
Posted on 7/8/13 at 8:43 am to Broke
Posted on 7/8/13 at 8:43 am to Broke
quote:
And there it is. You can set your watch by it. Any time someone disagrees, they are dumb. From what I've read over the past few months, Benny is not even remotely close to dumb.
He's not dumb, but he is a statist bastard.
I don't know how to make the trademark symbol on my computer
0
Posted on 7/8/13 at 8:53 am to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
1. How will this be any different than what we currently have?
2. How is it any better than what we currently have?
It's very different in that it's not controlled by a central authority and its supply is limited. I know you don't see any significance to that, but a lot of people do. Not only that, but it also offers many end-user benefits that legacy currencies do not, such as being able to store it safely without needing to use a bank, being able to send it or receive it instantly at all hours of the day on any day of the year without needing to go through a third party - which is important because that means it is censorship resistant in that banks or processing companies can't exclude certain customers of their choosing (and yes, that does happen frequently). It can be sent across political borders with ease. An individual can also travel globally with large amounts of bitcoins without any governments being able to stop it. Transaction fees are extremely low if they exist at all.
All of these are SIGNIFICANT benefits over the legacy currency system. I've mentioned them a million times in these threads but most of y'all refuse to even acknowledge those as benefits. There's nothing I can really do for you if you refuse to see the writing on the wall.
It's like someone arguing that a circuit switched system is better than a packet switched system. Which brings me to my next point: I don't have a response to most of the mumbo-jumbo you posted above. You come at this from the perspective of a banker vested in the existing system. You are clearly more educated on the existing system than I am and you are better versed in its apologetics.
Couple other points I wanted to address:
I dislike how you always try to separate the Federal Reserve system from the politicians. Any time you acknowledge something negative about the system, you always then blame the politicians. You can't separate them. They are all a part of the same system. You're essentially arguing that the central banks would be damn near perfect if not for meddling politicians. As you stated on another issue, "it comes down to appicational (sic) reality." The reality of the application of central banks is that they are integrated into the political system.
Also, I don't care if that's what Benny meant when he made that statement. He may have, although he was agreeing with Milton Friedman, and I guarantee Friedman's argument wasn't that the Federal Reserve didn't do enough....so I don't really know where you are coming from on this. However, even if Benny did mean it in the way that you say, it doesn't mean he's right.
You seem unwilling to acknowledge any criticisms of central banking.
This post was edited on 7/8/13 at 8:57 am
Posted on 7/8/13 at 8:56 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
You are not the first person to ask Wiki for answers as to why people should use Bitcoins, or how Bitcoins are superior to existing forms of money.
He's not. Many have. And I've answered them almost every time it's been asked.
quote:
I, and others, have asked Wiki what recourse Bitcoin users will have against others with whom they have grievances, and he usually abandons the thread at that point,
You people are some of the most dishonest debaters I have even engaged with.
I've already discussed the technical applications of this and talked about how third party escrow can be used, OR, built in escrow can be used. You see, if you did any research, you'd know that the bitcoin protocol has built in escrow potential. It just hasn't been fully developed yet.
Posted on 7/8/13 at 8:57 am to WikiTiger
quote:
appicational (sic)
Now who is the spelling nazi, hypocrite?
Posted on 7/8/13 at 9:05 am to WikiTiger
Posted on 7/8/13 at 9:10 am to WikiTiger
quote:
it also offers many end-user benefits that legacy currencies do not, such as
quote:Existing currencies can be stored safely without using a bank.
being able to store it safely without needing to use a bank,
quote:This is a faux argument and is just plain silly. I seriously doubt anyone on this board has ever needed to do that and if they did, using a third party is a measure of insurance, not an inconvenience.
being able to send it or receive it instantly at all hours of the day on any day of the year without needing to go through a third party
In addition, I have worked in countries where the internet is not routinely available and/or the electricity only works a few hours each day, if at all that day. Tell me how convenient your BTC is when you can't access the internet or the cell towers are not working because the power is off to them. You need to get out into the real world more....
quote:
because that means it is censorship resistant in that banks or processing companies can't exclude certain customers of their choosing (and yes, that does happen frequently).
Such as when an illegal transaction is attempted, Mr. Drug Dealer?
quote:So can dollars. I take dollars with me across borders all the time. No issues, no red tape. Plus, I take a $25,000 credit line on my credit card with me around the world all the time. Safe, secure, instantaneous access to a payment system. You're being silly again.
It can be sent across political borders with ease
quote:I've taken $9,000 cash with me across borders. No issues, no problems. Who needs more than that, Mr. Drug Dealer?
An individual can also travel globally with large amounts of bitcoins without any governments being able to stop it.
quote:There are zero transaction fees with credit cards for the purchaser. In fact, I get paid cash back for using my credit card. If I use btc to buy something, will the seller give me some of my cash back?
Transaction fees are extremely low if they exist at all.
quote:Could it be because the "reasons" you give are stupid and aren't benefits to the average person or those benefits can be enjoyed using existing currencies? Hmmmm????
. I've mentioned them a million times in these threads but most of y'all refuse to even acknowledge those as benefits.
You can keep repeating your fake "reasons" but any intelligent person knows you're wrong.
This post was edited on 7/8/13 at 9:17 am
Posted on 7/8/13 at 9:26 am to WikiTiger
I guess I just did a bad job at explaining when you post this:
and this:
When the bolded is very similar to our current system in application. At this point I'll just accept that I did a poor job of communicating my point.
The thing is I know what you're talking about, I have a self-taught background of coding myself. I see your point but I would argue that our current monetary system isn't exactly a cicruit switched system. Regardless I don't want to stray off topic here.
They absolutely are seperate and they have to be, the worst central bank we ever had was the Miller and Burns central bank in the 70's. I do know the true criticisms of central banks. Central banking isn't perfect, nothing is perfect. Everything has flaws, there is no silver bullet. The real criticisms of central banks are that they are often too early or too late (2000, 2004, 2007), they sometimes are politically influenced (the entire 1970's), and politicians feel like they give them a blank check (the past 60 years). If you want to make the arguement that the sheer existence of a central bank connects them to politicians for this reason I'll give you that, I always give that point and I have to Doc several times, because it's true. It's unfortunate but it's true. However, my belief in central banks isn't due to my existence as a "banker vested in the existing system". I come at this as a student of history knowing the alternative of no central bank versus that of one with a central bank.
Since central banks came in the picture, economies have run smoother, recessions are less often and shorter, living conditions have increased, the innovative spirit has increased due to access of funding, and technology has sky-rocketed due to the increase in the innovative spirit. I know you'll argue against some of that and that central banks had nothing to do with any of it, but I'm not arguing they were the main reason. I'm arguing that they were a contributing factor rather than a deterring one. No central bank leads to lower availability of credit, without credit many ideas become lost on the wayside. It's not that central banks are some sort of mystical beacons of awesomeness, its just that solution A is better than solution B.
quote:
don't have a response to most of the mumbo-jumbo you posted above.
and this:
quote:
It's very different in that it's not controlled by a central authority and its supply is limited. I know you don't see any significance to that, but a lot of people do. Not only that, but it also offers many end-user benefits that legacy currencies do not, such as being able to store it safely without needing to use a bank, being able to send it or receive it instantly at all hours of the day on any day of the year without needing to go through a third party - which is important because that means it is censorship resistant in that banks or processing companies can't exclude certain customers of their choosing (and yes, that does happen frequently). It can be sent across political borders with ease. An individual can also travel globally with large amounts of bitcoins without any governments being able to stop it. Transaction fees are extremely low if they exist at all.
When the bolded is very similar to our current system in application. At this point I'll just accept that I did a poor job of communicating my point.
quote:
It's like someone arguing that a circuit switched system is better than a packet switched system.
The thing is I know what you're talking about, I have a self-taught background of coding myself. I see your point but I would argue that our current monetary system isn't exactly a cicruit switched system. Regardless I don't want to stray off topic here.
quote:
I dislike how you always try to separate the Federal Reserve system from the politicians. Any time you acknowledge something negative about the system, you always then blame the politicians. You can't separate them.
They absolutely are seperate and they have to be, the worst central bank we ever had was the Miller and Burns central bank in the 70's. I do know the true criticisms of central banks. Central banking isn't perfect, nothing is perfect. Everything has flaws, there is no silver bullet. The real criticisms of central banks are that they are often too early or too late (2000, 2004, 2007), they sometimes are politically influenced (the entire 1970's), and politicians feel like they give them a blank check (the past 60 years). If you want to make the arguement that the sheer existence of a central bank connects them to politicians for this reason I'll give you that, I always give that point and I have to Doc several times, because it's true. It's unfortunate but it's true. However, my belief in central banks isn't due to my existence as a "banker vested in the existing system". I come at this as a student of history knowing the alternative of no central bank versus that of one with a central bank.
Since central banks came in the picture, economies have run smoother, recessions are less often and shorter, living conditions have increased, the innovative spirit has increased due to access of funding, and technology has sky-rocketed due to the increase in the innovative spirit. I know you'll argue against some of that and that central banks had nothing to do with any of it, but I'm not arguing they were the main reason. I'm arguing that they were a contributing factor rather than a deterring one. No central bank leads to lower availability of credit, without credit many ideas become lost on the wayside. It's not that central banks are some sort of mystical beacons of awesomeness, its just that solution A is better than solution B.
Posted on 7/8/13 at 9:31 am to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
I'll just accept that I did a poor job of communicating my point.
quote:
I guess I just did a bad job at explaining
You did a great job of articulating your points.
Posted on 7/8/13 at 9:52 am to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
When the bolded is very similar to our current system in application.
I'll expand on how exactly all the points I made are better:
quote:
such as being able to store it safely without needing to use a bank
The use of a bank subjects a person to potential fees, potentially being locked out of their account, delays in receiving their money (banking hours), and financial surveillance, among other things. And sure, you can store cash without a bank, but it's risky. You can't make backups of cash. You can make backups of bitcoin wallets.
quote:
being able to send it or receive it instantly at all hours of the day on any day of the year without needing to go through a third party - which is important because that means it is censorship resistant in that banks or processing companies can't exclude certain customers of their choosing (and yes, that does happen frequently)
Transfer times are not instant in the legacy banking system. There is also the potential for chargebacks or reversals. The delays in international transfers can be pretty long as well, and they come with high fees. Bitcoin transactions are instant and cheap.
Not only that, but bitcoin uses can't be excluded. Major credit cards companies, as well as PayPal routinely do this. It happened to wikileaks too. There are something like 60+ countries where traditional payment mechanisms don't work because of fraud or political issues or simply a business decision by payment processors. Bitcoin transcends all that.
quote:
An individual can also travel globally with large amounts of bitcoins without any governments being able to stop it.
As it stands now, if you travel with any large amount of cash on hand, you run a high risk of getting it seized by states. That is not a problem with bitcoin.
You may not need to do that, but there are many who would find that beneficial.
quote:
Transaction fees are extremely low if they exist at all.
I don't know why you bolded this one. Bitcoin transactions are so much cheaper than traditional paymeny mechanism that it's not even funny.
Posted on 7/8/13 at 10:06 am to WikiTiger
quote:
The use of a bank subjects a person to potential fees, potentially being locked out of their account, delays in receiving their money (banking hours)
Funny, I don't have any of these problems.
Posted on 7/8/13 at 10:13 am to WikiTiger
quote:
The use of a bank subjects a person to potential fees,
My banks not only does not charge me any fees for keeping my deposits safe, they actually PAY ME for keeping my deposits safe.
quote:BTC has the exact same potential.
potentially being locked out of their account,
quote:Have you never heard of "automated teller machines"? 24 hour access to my funds, without any fees. I can also use the bill pay system my bank provides me for free to pay most of my bills online, safe and secure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Instant access to all my money all the time. Too bad you don't understand how to use the internet to conduct your financial transactions.....
delays in receiving their money (banking hours)
quote:Are you trying to convince people that the authorities around the world are not tracking btc transactions? Seriously??
and financial surveillance
quote:Not really. It's certainly no more risky than the numerous incidents of bitcoin accounts being hacked resulting in btc being stolen, never to be recovered by the owners.
And sure, you can store cash without a bank, but it's risky.
quote:Sure you can. I can back up (by printing out) my bank statement anytime I want to. Therefore I have proof I had the money in the bank. You're being silly again.
You can't make backups of cash.
quote:Nor are they "instant" in the btc system. It takes time to verify the btc code is valid and not duplicated. You taught us that. Did you forget?
Transfer times are not instant in the legacy banking system.
quote:Which protects the buyer. The buyer has ZERO protection when using bitcoin. Your "advantage" is a disadvantage to half of the users of btc transactions.
There is also the potential for chargebacks or reversals.
quote:Nope. I've received a wire transfer while in Moscow within minutes. BTC transactions on the bitcoin exchanges can take days to complete. On Mt Gox now (the largest btc exchange) btc owners who want to get dollar for their bitcoins can't get ANY dollars out no matter how long they wait. Dollar withdrawals are not allowed.
The delays in international transfers can be pretty long as well,
And before you try to use your usual strawman argument about the exchanges are not the bitcoin "system," you are referring to getting money out of the 'system' in an international transfer system which you can only do if you go through an exchange.
quote:You're kidding, right? There are numerous examples of bitcoin accounts being frozen or seized. Plus, the market, which you love, excludes most bitcoin transactions by not accepting bitcoins for payment for their goods or services.
but bitcoin uses can't be excluded.
quote:No, you don't. You run a risk, but a small one, not a "high risk." I've made over 200 international trips for work and I've never had any of my money seized by any authority. So you could say I've had ZERO risk. And I have been to some very totalitarian, schizo countries. ZERO money taken from me.
if you travel with any large amount of cash on hand, you run a high risk of getting it seized by states.
This post was edited on 7/8/13 at 10:21 am
Posted on 7/8/13 at 12:00 pm to LSURussian
quote:
And I have been to some very totalitarian, schizo countries. ZERO money taken from me.
There are no Statist Bastards™ there
Posted on 7/9/13 at 3:59 am to Broke
Speaking of Statist Bastards™, and appropriate to all discussions of currency foibles, let's not forget God's Own Republica Banana - Argentina: from The Economist.
Posted on 7/9/13 at 8:44 am to WikiTiger
quote:
I don't know why you bolded this one. Bitcoin transactions are so much cheaper than traditional paymeny mechanism that it's not even funny.
I hate to break it to you but bitcoin is a looooong ways away from being able to avoid exchanging into currency as a transaction. And right now bitcoin bid/ask spreads are massively wider than any currency exchange in the world. I understand btc-btc have low transaction costs and even none if you meet certain conditions, but you don't mention the small mining fees associated with bitcoin. You also don't mention that a major reason banks have large transaction fees is for security purposes, in which bitcoin is severely lacking. I think you were a little quick to pull out you're ROFLmoticon. Russian answered a lot of your points but I can expand when I get a second today.
Posted on 7/9/13 at 8:50 am to Coeur du Tigre
If Bitcoins were as untraceable and anonymous as Wiki alleges, then why haven't Argentines bought up every available Bitcoin? The total market value of all Bitcoins is less than $1 billion but Argentines hold an estimated $160 billion of illegal American currency. I guess this is proof that there aren't any Argentines as smart as Wiki, and the Winklevoss brothers, since they are foregoing the opportunity to convert their useless fiat currency to the miracle that is crypto-currency.
Posted on 7/9/13 at 9:15 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
If Bitcoins were as untraceable and anonymous as Wiki alleges, then why haven't Argentines bought up every available Bitcoin? The total market value of all Bitcoins is less than $1 billion but Argentines hold an estimated $160 billion of illegal American currency. I guess this is proof that there aren't any Argentines as smart as Wiki, and the Winklevoss brothers, since they are foregoing the opportunity to convert their useless fiat currency to the miracle that is crypto-currency.
Take this FWIW: Bitcoins Soar In Value In Argentina Due To Capital Control Laws, Bitcoin MeetUp Held In Nation’s Capital
quote:
Compared to Argentina’s much more freedom-orientated neighbor Uruguay, values of Bitcoins in Buenos Aires are between 30% and 40% higher than just 75 kilometers away in Colonia del Sacramento, Uruguay according to Argentinian Bitcoin expert Mauro Betschart.
Posted on 7/9/13 at 9:19 am to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
I understand btc-btc have low transaction costs and even none if you meet certain conditions
yup
quote:
but you don't mention the small mining fees associated with bitcoin
The what? No. You are misunderstanding. There is no "mining fee" that anyone pays. There is an optional transaction fee that you pay that will go to the miner who eventually processes your transaction. Right now the standard fee for a basic transaction is .0001 bitcoins, or $0.0075 dollars, however, no fee transactions are processed pretty quickly as well (although that will probably change as the amount of bitcoin transactions grow.
quote:
You also don't mention that a major reason banks have large transaction fees is for security purposes, in which bitcoin is severely lacking.
You could not be more wrong here. The whole purpose of "miners" is to secure the network using proof of work. The bitcoin protocol is not lacking in security. Now, if you want to argue that third parties dealing in bitcoin lack security, then I'd say you're right.
This post was edited on 7/9/13 at 9:22 am
Posted on 7/9/13 at 9:23 am to WikiTiger
How can the value of bitcoins differ between countries if bitcoins, as you claim, can cross country boundaries with such ease via the internet and without being detected?
ETA: Is there an exclusive btc exchange for only Argentinians? If so, why don't they buy their bitcoins on another exchange where they can pay "30-40%" less?
The entire premise of your post is ludicrous.
ETA: Is there an exclusive btc exchange for only Argentinians? If so, why don't they buy their bitcoins on another exchange where they can pay "30-40%" less?
The entire premise of your post is ludicrous.
This post was edited on 7/9/13 at 9:26 am
Posted on 7/9/13 at 9:35 am to BennyAndTheInkJets
quote:
I hate to break it to you but bitcoin is a looooong ways away from being able to avoid exchanging into currency as a transaction. And right now bitcoin bid/ask spreads are massively wider than any currency exchange in the world.
oh, and FWIW, you can still exchange bitcoin for fiat for less than 1%.
in other words, a person could buy bitcoins with fiat for a 0.99% fee, send it to another person, and then person 2 could exchange their bitcoins for fiat for 0.99% and still have the whole process be cheaper than using a credit card, PayPal or many other money transfer systems like Western Union
This post was edited on 7/9/13 at 9:41 am
Posted on 7/9/13 at 9:40 am to LSURussian
More evidence of Wiki never mastering the concepts of Econ 101. The same can probably be said for his Argentine Bitcoin expert. Speaking of which, I wonder what makes him an expert on Bitcoins, and if Argentine standards for expertise are so low they don't include an understanding of economics? I guess all of the Uruguayan Bitcoin experts were unavailable for the article Wiki linked.
ETA: My recollection of Wiki's post was incorrect. I thought the Bitcoin expert was from Uruguay rather than Argentina. I corrected my mistake.
ETA: My recollection of Wiki's post was incorrect. I thought the Bitcoin expert was from Uruguay rather than Argentina. I corrected my mistake.
This post was edited on 7/9/13 at 9:43 am
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News