First line of post: "...and the next decade may start to see smartphone sales decline"......unless you prefer the politician's usage of "decline" (decline in growth). Ugh.
History and common sense prove my statements correct, despite what mainstream (Keynesian) economists falsely believe. Yet my comments get moderated down. Typical slashdot.
"When an economy is working, the dollar will buy less and less over time" -- typical Keynesian claptrap.
Real money? You clearly have no sense of history. The current fiat experiment is only about ~100 years old, has proven to be a colossal failure, and will end badly.
> they're talking about exchanges, and a large number of exchanges deal in Bitcoin. This has everything to do with Bitcoin.
FALSE. centralized exchanges (e.g. banks) that offer storage and trading are not bitcoin. they're vestiges of an old system; they're temporary bridges between the old and they new. They can go away completely and bitcoin itself is not affected.
> Because of it's limited total number, it can't absorb the world's total economy
FALSE. Your ignorance is on display. The number is irrelevant. 0.00000001 BTC could be worth $1,000,000 in theory.
> The modern world basically wouldn't exist if we were still on the gold standard.
You must be drunk on Keyensian economics, indicating you have zero standing to be lecturing anyone on economics. I've studied economics even more than I've studied bitcoin.
> Governments can and will regulate real world transactions.
FALSE. Stating this indicates you have no idea how bitcoin works. Do a little research, perhaps.
I'm sure you'll respond to this with more snarkiness and displays of ignorance. It's a waste of time. I'll let you have the final word; it'll give your fragile ego the boost it needs.
Unfortunately, I couldn't grow a beard if I wanted to. Not much of one anyway.
It always amazes me how so many on slashdot these days are anti cypherpunk. The same technology that gives you so many of the tools you take for granted today are the stepping stones for bitcoin.
Your arguments remind me of those of Cliff Stoll and Bill Gates back in the early 1990's - how the internet would never amount to much.
Exchanges like Coinbase and others are only temporary on-ramps until bitcoin has absorbed all the world's fiat. Like any good technology, it takes a long time to roll out, especially game-changing ones. If you think there haven't been amazing advances in the past 9 years (bitcoin not exist a decade ago) then you simply haven't been paying attention.
And lastly, economics. I've read an advanced copy of this book, and I highly recommend it once it's released at the end of next month: https://smile.amazon.com/Bitco...
In any event, I think you'll find yourself on the wrong side of history on this one.
The vast majority of ICOs are scams. Whether or not they're "regulated" by the state is immaterial to bitcoin. Bitcoin has nothing to do with ICOs, and vice versa.
I understand it's a new and confusing concept to understand, but the new way forward is decentralized governance, and the sooner everyone understands it the sooner we can dispense with this sort of poppycock. The government cannot touch bitcoin. They can buy it and survive, or resist it and die. There's no two ways about it.
It should be obvious that my statement implicitly excludes current fiat currencies.
However if you look at what caused the destruction of all previous fiat currencies, and the current policies and actions with current fiat currency problems, the same path is being followed. There's little reason to think that "this time it's different".
Of course the stated reason for leaving the gold standard was instability, but it's utter nonsense. $100 in 1812 purchased roughly the same amount of goods in 1912. But then the Fed took over, and a fake gold standard began, which was then completely dropped by Nixon in 1971. Now the dollar has about 4 cents of buying power compared to 100 years ago.
The real reason for abandoning the gold standard, of course, was so that government could fund it's ever-increasing budgets. Inflation is a great way to tax people with out "raising taxes". Simply steal from your money's purchasing power.
What real/inherent value do your paper dollars hold?
You do realize that it's a fiat currency back by nothing, and infinitely manipulated by its creator, the Federal Reserve, right? You may be able to buy stuff with it now, but that won't always be the case (and indeed there's ample evidence that it won't be the case for much longer).
BTC, on the other hand, is finite and not easily manipulated like fiat currency.
So while the market cap of BTC is very small, which will inevitably result in seeming instability in its early years (i.e. now), it'll seem tame by comparison when you witness the instability coming to your favorite fiat currency.
Slashdot Mirror
Jesus!
Headline: "We're in the smartphone decline"
First line of post: "...and the next decade may start to see smartphone sales decline" ......unless you prefer the politician's usage of "decline" (decline in growth). Ugh.
Forced? Let me guess.....for the common good?
Whatever happened to property rights?
...when the voices of reason are coming from Russia and China.
History and common sense prove my statements correct, despite what mainstream (Keynesian) economists falsely believe. Yet my comments get moderated down. Typical slashdot.
"When an economy is working, the dollar will buy less and less over time" -- typical Keynesian claptrap.
Real money? You clearly have no sense of history. The current fiat experiment is only about ~100 years old, has proven to be a colossal failure, and will end badly.
> they're talking about exchanges, and a large number of exchanges deal in Bitcoin. This has everything to do with Bitcoin.
FALSE. centralized exchanges (e.g. banks) that offer storage and trading are not bitcoin. they're vestiges of an old system; they're temporary bridges between the old and they new. They can go away completely and bitcoin itself is not affected.
> Because of it's limited total number, it can't absorb the world's total economy
FALSE. Your ignorance is on display. The number is irrelevant. 0.00000001 BTC could be worth $1,000,000 in theory.
> The modern world basically wouldn't exist if we were still on the gold standard.
You must be drunk on Keyensian economics, indicating you have zero standing to be lecturing anyone on economics. I've studied economics even more than I've studied bitcoin.
> Governments can and will regulate real world transactions.
FALSE. Stating this indicates you have no idea how bitcoin works. Do a little research, perhaps.
I'm sure you'll respond to this with more snarkiness and displays of ignorance. It's a waste of time. I'll let you have the final word; it'll give your fragile ego the boost it needs.
Hahaha, neckbeard.
Unfortunately, I couldn't grow a beard if I wanted to. Not much of one anyway.
It always amazes me how so many on slashdot these days are anti cypherpunk. The same technology that gives you so many of the tools you take for granted today are the stepping stones for bitcoin.
Your arguments remind me of those of Cliff Stoll and Bill Gates back in the early 1990's - how the internet would never amount to much.
Exchanges like Coinbase and others are only temporary on-ramps until bitcoin has absorbed all the world's fiat. Like any good technology, it takes a long time to roll out, especially game-changing ones. If you think there haven't been amazing advances in the past 9 years (bitcoin not exist a decade ago) then you simply haven't been paying attention.
And lastly, economics. I've read an advanced copy of this book, and I highly recommend it once it's released at the end of next month: https://smile.amazon.com/Bitco...
In any event, I think you'll find yourself on the wrong side of history on this one.
Wow, so many misconceptions in one sentence!
But you're right, people don't want to be free. Most want to be controlled.
Bitcoin's price is dropping because there have been a lot of big SELLs today. Nothing to do with unrelated US "regulation" nonsense.
See: https://twitter.com/matt_odell...
The vast majority of ICOs are scams. Whether or not they're "regulated" by the state is immaterial to bitcoin. Bitcoin has nothing to do with ICOs, and vice versa.
I understand it's a new and confusing concept to understand, but the new way forward is decentralized governance, and the sooner everyone understands it the sooner we can dispense with this sort of poppycock. The government cannot touch bitcoin. They can buy it and survive, or resist it and die. There's no two ways about it.
Only socialists are economically illiterate enough to use the word "gouge".
...unless you're a socialist.
http://thegreatbitcoinbubble.c...
http://mikemiller.net/bitcoin_...
Yes, of course. I didnâ(TM)t mean that Linux is hard, only that only smart people use it. :)
Iâ(TM)ve been running exclusively linux since the 0.98 kernel loaded from a stack of 15+ floppies, and there was no GUI.
My post was jokingly elitist. Iâ(TM)m old. From way, way back when Slashdot was cool.
-Mike
Haha.
The Linux desktop is only for smart people, and there are a limited number of those. Therefore, the Linux desktop will never be popular.
Seriously?
It should be obvious that my statement implicitly excludes current fiat currencies.
However if you look at what caused the destruction of all previous fiat currencies, and the current policies and actions with current fiat currency problems, the same path is being followed. There's little reason to think that "this time it's different".
Of course the stated reason for leaving the gold standard was instability, but it's utter nonsense. $100 in 1812 purchased roughly the same amount of goods in 1912. But then the Fed took over, and a fake gold standard began, which was then completely dropped by Nixon in 1971. Now the dollar has about 4 cents of buying power compared to 100 years ago.
The real reason for abandoning the gold standard, of course, was so that government could fund it's ever-increasing budgets. Inflation is a great way to tax people with out "raising taxes". Simply steal from your money's purchasing power.
Historical context, along with technological literacy, goes a long way to clearly perceiving reality.
I'm 100% confident that BTC (or some similar cryptocurrency) will long outlast the dollar or any other fiat currency.
I should say the same thing.
Every fiat currency that has ever existed since time immemorial has crashed and burned. It's even happened several times in US history.
But somehow this time it won't?
What real/inherent value do your paper dollars hold?
You do realize that it's a fiat currency back by nothing, and infinitely manipulated by its creator, the Federal Reserve, right? You may be able to buy stuff with it now, but that won't always be the case (and indeed there's ample evidence that it won't be the case for much longer).
BTC, on the other hand, is finite and not easily manipulated like fiat currency.
So while the market cap of BTC is very small, which will inevitably result in seeming instability in its early years (i.e. now), it'll seem tame by comparison when you witness the instability coming to your favorite fiat currency.
Sounds like "MindPrison" is a fitting name for this person.