Man these bankers are totally destrying the world, for like a 100 years well really way longer, wow what assholes...geez man....oh,wait....is it not true that they hold this power over us because they control the creation of the money....or is it that we have faith in and use the money...I mean wow, golly, if that's the case, I mean shucks...I guess if we stopped using their money they wouldn't really have any power over you...cause like all the people that they'd pay to "do stuff to you" would be getting paid with their old crappy usury money....and well gosh we the people "hated it" ;} and moved on...
you know why bitcoin didn;t/isn't working....it's creation wasn;t transparent and collectively created with the benefit of everyone in mind
view the rest of the comments →
rupertmandrake ago
Wait - Bitcoin's not working?? Since when, exactly? All the BTC i have sent & received have worked perfectly for the past 4 years or so, which seems rather impressive to me anyway. I'm confused at your stance. Bitcoin is still in its infancy - compare it to email in 1990. Patience, grasshopper. Decentralized exchanges are supremely powerful.
Please explain how Bitcoin's "creation wasn;t transparent" - the blockchain is 100% transparent and public. This is the knowledge that used to be only accessible to bankers/priests/elites, but now is sunshined for all to see and use.
000cccpcharm ago
Look the concept of bitcoin is great...I belive CC's can be the foundation and basic architecture for what will call "the peoples money"...for now. IF bitcoin was started in a way where its propagation was not "anonymous" if it's creation was a collective known start, where at the very least it's creation by even a small group was"public" and "known" with it's intent, then perhaps it would be more acceptable.
The mechanics, the process, the concept are very "perfect" as I said, a model for a future currency in many ways. However it was not started by the people, for the people. It's initial start up was small, word of mouth, and basically gave those with "faith" the ability to get in early, this allowed for people who had faith to take advantage of this...That is not a currency that can be assimilated to all, that is much more likend to getting in on a good stock before it goes up. Great for people who got in and "made" money, but based on this uneqaul start, it cannot be assimilated to the general population without distinct disadvantage to those who would start using it well after it's creation.
Furthermore, a CC, that being all of them, that is basing it's valuation in/on debt based currency is nothing more than a fluctuating commodity that will always be subject to the valuation of the debt based currency it is basing it's value on debt...This also does not work in the long run.
So wehn I say "bitcoin is not working" that depends on what you mean by "not working" and or won't be a viable replacement for the global population.
The "peoples" money will be a well thought out monetary system that will be design to serve the will of the people, with no one single entity,group,person being able to profit off the creation of the currency, no "debt" shall be attached to it's creation. This will be a group effort, relying on the brightest most moral minds we have...to create "the machine" the program, the architecture for an incorruptible impervious system that will never be able to be taken advantage of. Inflationary and deflationary cycles are mere illusions and byproducts of debt based currency.
Again if bitcoin was "transparent" we'd know who satoshi was, who he worked with, who were the first founders in the blockchain...let alone the ridiculous expenditure in electricity running mining machines....this is the equivalent of raping the earth wasting energy to get gold...both completely unnecessary....just like usd, just like bitcoin...the only reason they have value is because people THINK they do...it is "faith"....faith based currency works great ,,,AS LONG AS NO ONE IS PROFITING OFF IT'S CREATION WITH COMPOUNDING DAILY INTEREST
rupertmandrake ago
I hear you with your stance re: Bitcoin's mining / proof-of-work (PoW) system, and how it can be perceived to be inherently "wasteful" - but with this system comes incredible security, where it's now effectively impossible to game the network and attempt to undue it, as the amount of computer power required to do so is unobtainable (apart from the NSA perhaps). So while on the one hand it can be seen as being inefficient - it is extremely effective at doing it's job, the network is robust and highly secured. Perhaps a more salient argument can be made about the centralization of mining and the effects that has on the ecosystem. However that's temporary, and only remains an issue during the distribution phase, which is coming to an end...
There are alternate Blockchains out now, which have tackled the "wasteful" PoW problem via other methods, such as Proof of Stake, and even the more democratic Delegated Proof of Stake - look at what BitShares is up to - talk about power. They also have pegged assets which could solve the volatility and financial reporting problems - there are assets trading on the BitShares network which are pegged to the USD, CNY, Euro, Gold, Silver, etc. (Tho one could argue about the stability of any fiat, in the long run.) The BitShares technology has the power to completely cut out all middlemen from the financial and transactional world, talk about a revolutionary system. They are also developing the world's first and only counterparty-risk-free Bitcoin exchange - where it's impossible to have a Mt. Gox or BitStamp "hack" fiasco - where all these transactions are stored, managed, and completed via the Blockchain, and no 3rd party ever holds the private keys to the coins in question. Leveraging the power of the blockchain as a tool to undue the untold power of these weasels. This is exactly the problem with ALL the current exchanges, and is why we've seen so many hacks, outright thievery and worse from most of them. He who holds the keys has the responsibility (and the temptation, which has proven too strong for some). With BitShares, shorts are covered by a 3x amount of collateral up front, and each transaction on the network has a fee - something that should've been done a long time ago to Wall Street to stop the banksters from being able to rig the system and front run the public, high-speed mega-trades, etc.
However, your point about Bitcoin's genesis being "transparent" seems like hogwash. When Bitcoin launched in 2009 it was just an idea. If you look into the Genesis of it, it seems pretty remarkable at just how transparent it was (Satoshi's identity notwithstanding). Fwiw, i think the idea of it being a government sponsored project may hold merit (this is /v/Conspiracy afterall), as counter to what you seem to be implying, it's trivial for people and Bitcoins to be traced, and only with some clever knowhow are folks able to obscure themselves and their holdings, and even then, cashing out brings problems. Because of this - other "dark" coins have been developed, directly to counter the fact that Bitcoin is so utterly non-anonymous & traceable. The fact that the media keeps harping on this supposedly "anonymous" feature seems telling, cuz it's very far from the truth with Bitcoin and other clones.
If you can't see the value in a global network where one can send resources to anyone else on the planet, in minutes, for virutally no fee - then I'd invite you to watch this 6 minute video as they've done a very good job of explaning the effectiveness of this radical tool. Up until this technology, in order to move any sort of resources required the "blessings" of the priest class - the bankers, the lawyers, the transfer agents, and on and on - all people inbetween you and your mission, all taking a cut for doing the "service" of moving your resources for you - utterly unnecessary with this enabling technology. That is huge.
Lastly, yes, currently the value of Bitcoin is currently volatile, and one can expect it to remain that way for another year or so - summer of 2016 is when the supply rate will be cut in half once more, and one can then expect to see a stabilization of volatility, until then it's a bit of a gamble to hold in the short term. However, due to new technologies being developed, if stability is desired, it's now becoming easier and easier to move from BTC into fiat or something else, and that ease will only increase over time, so it's not required to hold BTC, and thus eliminating the volatility issue compeletely, if so desired, thus price swings are effectively moot. Tho they do make a coy, cutesy issue for those who have much to lose (and who lack perspective) to poke at.
xanaxinator ago
Wow, what a great post!
This is my first permalink on Voat...and its also going into my permanent knowledge database...which is quite an achievement for anybody--so thank you sir!
rupertmandrake ago
You're most welcome, and thank you for the kind words!