Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
You can't get rid of nation states and replace them with maths FFS. If you want to argue for an anarchist society then great, crack on, but you need a whole lot more than a new currency.
Bitcoin discussion and news
- Thread starter camouflage
- Start date
You can't get rid of nation states and replace them with maths FFS. If you want to argue for an anarchist society then great, crack on, but you need a whole lot more than a new currency.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Yes this is an odd paradox isn't it. It's hard to see exactly how something which so far looks to be mostly held by an odd collection of computer geeks, gangsters, and recently the sort of institutional investor that will presumably be first up against the wall come the revolution is going to lead to the new egalitarian era.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
But dont you see - thats what we are building
- governance systems - Radicle Blog - Introducing RAD
- justice systems - Homepage
- DAOs - Govern better, together
We are building this NOW.
This is dual power, this is building the new in the shell of the old.
All of it is made possible by bitcoin.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
I'm not saying that what we have now is right but it's a damn sight better than Bitcoin.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
I assure you Cryptonerds do indeed consider the $5 wrench attack.
blog.keys.casa
How to protect your bitcoin from $5 wrench attacks
If you want to be your own bank, you'll want bank-grade security measures. Thanks to technology we can surpass the physical security of a bank at a fraction of the cost!
blog.keys.casa
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
OK, so where do you get money from, or is all money abolished at the same time as nation states and we have a barter economy?
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Localised currencies and policies aren't such a bad idea, and definitely better than Bitcoin.
Do you think a single global currency, controlled by a handful of cartels, is somehow better than what we have? Do you think it could work even if it wasn't a ridiculously overinflated volatile bubble?
qwerty is actually giving us the exact alt-right libertarian fetishism that I was referring to. No society, no system, just independent free agents all completely isolated from each other. The only rights under that system are property rights.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
I have no problem with what consenting geeks get up to in their spare time but this has nothing to say about what would replace a collapsing nation state.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
It's a funny XKCD but I was not seriously talking about $5 wrench attacks
Really, I'm talking about the state's monopoly on violence. If this stuff truly does what you say it does, and it starts taking off, it will be crushed.
PS: If nation states do start collapsing, you can kiss goodbye to the stable and small-l liberal internet on which such things depend.
Really, I'm talking about the state's monopoly on violence. If this stuff truly does what you say it does, and it starts taking off, it will be crushed.
PS: If nation states do start collapsing, you can kiss goodbye to the stable and small-l liberal internet on which such things depend.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
What are you on about?
What is it that you think money is? What is money for?
You appear both to be anti money and pro money. You're all over the place.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I seem to be being pulled up for calling bitcoin evil. I guess that is because that word has religious undertones. I'm not religious. I'm atheist. But bitcoin does have big moral implications, which is why I think the word 'evil' is appropriate here. Qwerty, Idaho and the other enthusiasts all exemplify why it is evil. The way that it takes in good people and makes them believe utter fucking bullshit is evil.
I've seen this process happen with people who are very close to me and I will not stop using the 'E' word wrt bitcoin. You're not evil for having been taken in by it, but you have been taken in by something evil.
I've seen this process happen with people who are very close to me and I will not stop using the 'E' word wrt bitcoin. You're not evil for having been taken in by it, but you have been taken in by something evil.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
It's no more evil than any Ponzi scheme, it's just more complicated, and those who invest in it and try to convince their friends to invest in it are no more evil than those who invest in other Ponzi schemes and try to convince their friends to invest in it. They're either gullible or they know exactly what they're doing, neither of which is a good look.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Ponzi schemes are pretty evil, though. Normally they have individuals (like the eponymous Ponzi) at whom we can direct our disapproval, but the lack of such a person to focus on doesn't lessen its evil.
Not all enthusiasts for capitalism are evil, by any means. Doesn't make capitalism itself not evil.
Saul Goodman
It's all good, man
Oh it's definitely evil. Bitcoin's price is controlled by cartels, and propped up by gullible people, exactly like any Ponzi scheme (apart from maybe the cartels side). It's the ultimate Ponzi scheme. There isn't even a product that must be obscured. Some of those investors are evil, most of them are gullible, but anybody who invests in a currency that can make them rich, and at the same time thinks it's a worthy global currency, is a fucking idiot.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
No. Those are made possible by blockchain.
Do you realise it's possible to think that bitcoin is a waste of energy and can't work as a currency because of the way it is designed, whilst also considering that blockchain might be used in different ways for different things that might be interesting?
Like I think bitcoin is fucked in terms of energy usage and there's no way that it can work to manage the transactions in an economy even if it solves the energy problem (which I think is inherent to PoW and therefore Bitcoin) - I present reasons for that asking how you think it can work and you don't reply, instead you start talking about how blockchain can be used in totally different ways for totally different purposes as if that's a way to respond to criticisms of bitcoin's potential as a currency.
Trusting maths to understand human behaviour gave us Rational Choice Theory and "Homo Economicus". Bitcoins have funded fucking loads of far right groups and if adopted by nations would fund all those things you've talked about national currencies funding. Nation States necessitate national currencies, not the other way around and capitalism necessitates the nation state. Socialism and Anarchism do not need currencies to function imo, but if they do then a PoW crypto like BTC is not going to work as one. As long as population grows and production efficiency increases, economies will grow and a currency is just a functional item to keep track of actual activity in an economy. If it's not flexible enough to meet the needs of an economy (and burns fucktons of energy to do it, which is really needed elsewhere) then a different solution is needed.
q_w_e_r_t_y
You see an investment scam and I see divinity
Blockchain not bitcoin was the 2017 rallying call.
But bitcoin is what gives blockchain its security and enables decentralisation - thats the point of it.
A blockchain without a currency is just an overengineered database.
Bitcoin enables other cryptos because bitcoin is the longest chain and the most secure. Hence things are measured against it in the crypto world, Proof of work and energy consumption are the point of bitcoin. You think that energy is a waste, but you live in a Western economy with access to comprehensive and secure banking services, low inflation and benefit from centuries of colonialism.
If socialism and anarchism dont need currencies, then how do people exchange things? Notjust things like 2 eggs for 1 loaf, but complex products like, say, this laptop. Or is your thinking that we should embrace primitativism, and just work the land?
I'm not trusting maths to understand human behaviour, I'm trusting maths to understand value, value which goes well beyond the human, the fact that you see it as a human function is just human supremacy....which has got us into this mess in the first place. Look - here is a forest that owns itself. No national currency ever did that. All this technology is nascient, its only around 10 years old, its developing at an amazing pace, but its potential is astonishing. It is truely the only thing that gives me hope.
Terra0, the augmented self-owned forest • Digicult | Digital Art, Design and Culture
[:en]Terra0 is a project that has just been discussed at Transmediale, Berlin, during the panel Becoming Earth: Engineering Symbiotic Futures. The project, at his first steps of development, aims at the creation of the first self-owned augmented forest, by using the blockchain technology and the...
digicult.it
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I don't know a lot about crypto currency but I'm fairly sure that this isn't true. Or things might be measured against it in the sense of 'this is x more secure than bitcoin', not in a positive way.
Nivag
Well-Known Member
Police bust bitcoin mine in search for cannabis factory
Its the second of its kind to be found in the West Midlands
BigTom
Well-Known Member
[/QUOTE]
Do you think all crypto tokens are currencies, regardless of how they are used? Because if you do then what you think "currency" means is not what I think "currency" means or what the normal economic definitions of currency are.
Other blockchains don't (have to) rely on BTC for security or decentralistion, they have their own networks, nodes, miners etc. If BTC fell to zero value, other blockchains could still exist. BTC gives some level of credibility to speculative bitcoins but if it dies, blockchain will most likely continue in other applications.
[/QUOTE]
Yes I do, and for people who don't there are more energy efficient systems that can achieve the same results as bitcoin that could be put in place. That energy can then be used for heating, A/C, vehicles, industry, lighting, cooking...
What proportion of bitcoin do you think is owned by people in the developing world, and how many of the people in the developing world can afford that average $15/tx fee BTC currently attracts?
If socialism and anarchism dont need currencies, then how do people exchange things? Notjust things like 2 eggs for 1 loaf, but complex products like, say, this laptop. Or is your thinking that we should embrace primitativism, and just work the land?
I'm not trusting maths to understand human behaviour, I'm trusting maths to understand value, value which goes well beyond the human, the fact that you see it as a human function is just human supremacy....which has got us into this mess in the first place. Look - here is a forest that owns itself. No national currency ever did that. All this technology is nascient, its only around 10 years old, its developing at an amazing pace, but its potential is astonishing. It is truely the only thing that gives me hope.
Terra0, the augmented self-owned forest • Digicult | Digital Art, Design and Culture
[:en]Terra0 is a project that has just been discussed at Transmediale, Berlin, during the panel Becoming Earth: Engineering Symbiotic Futures. The project, at his first steps of development, aims at the creation of the first self-owned augmented forest, by using the blockchain technology and the...digicult.it
A mutual aid based economy does not need to keep a ledger of the transactions that take place in an economy because there is no need for anyone to prove that they have earned the product they want to consume. You need to keep track of production and consumption to keep them balanced, but not transactions, so you don't need a currency. Communities know what resources / products they have available, what surplus they have, what they are short of. Communities will send surpluses to other communities that are short of that product, and receive the things they are short of from those communities with surpluses. Where overall scarcity exists we run into problems with an idealised system like I'm outlining in this paragraph but these don't have to be managed with a currency.
Now as my post made clear, I'm not sure that'll actually work in practice, you might need something like a currency to keep track of production and consumption, or it might turn out that a currency is the best way of doing this compared to eg: production companies doing stock checks, which measures both production and consumption, and adjusting production accordingly, and communities/individuals self-regulating consumption on the basis of need where shortages exist.
That's a real paradigm shift.
As would a shift not to seeing a forest as owning itself, but to drop the concept of ownership entirely. Like kabbes said earlier, your worldview is based on property rights. You see this as good because it transfers property rights - rights created by humans in a human society, which can be removed just as easily, just like so much common land had property rights transferred in the enclosures. The real paradigm shift is the rejection of property rights as a basis for anything.
And none of that is about human supremacy. I don't think human's can take those property rights because we have supremacy over nature, it's because that's the reality of the world. Those rights only exist as long as people in power allow them to, or have use of them - common land went because people in power enclosed the land.
How can a currency being used in a human economy not be related to humans and human behaviour?
Could you also expand on what you mean when you say maths understands value please.
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
The old bill raided a building expecting to find a cannabis factory and instead found a bitcoin mine using stolen 'leccy.
www.independent.co.uk
Cryptocurrency ‘mine’ found stealing electricity in West Midlands
West Midlands Police uncovered the operation at an industrial estate in Sandwell on May 18.
www.independent.co.uk
I'm no economist, so do I understand correctly that we should embrace inflation and rejoice at the increase of prices?
My income has been stagnant for coming on a decade now while the cost of living's going through the roof so something ain't working right with inflation.
Right now, for me, deflation sounds like a good thing. What am I missing?
Maybe it's your wages that are inflating and that's why you think its good?
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
I'm no economist either but i believe the problem with deflation is that people stop spending money because they think they will get things cheaper later if they wait. This then causes companies to lay people off so unemployment rises. Also deflation makes peoples debts more expensive. I'm sure someone else can explain it better than me.
moochedit
I'm not feeding seagulls
You beat me to it!Police bust bitcoin mine in search for cannabis factory
Its the second of its kind to be found in the West Midlandswww.birminghammail.co.uk
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Nope. My wages have been reducing for a decade due to a lack of pay rises to keep up with inflation.
At the microeconomic scale, of course whether or not your income goes up or down comes down to whether or not your wages keep up with inflation. This is not about that, though. At a macroeconomic scale, it's about the incentive to keep money circulating, whether that is through spending or 'saving' at a level of interest, which is actually lending. Deflation, even at a low level, seizes up an economy. If I have money that will go up in value without me doing anything, why would I risk lending it to you?
There are lots of potential objections to the concept of lending money at interest as the basis of money creation, but that is the system we currently have, and any proposed system to replace it needs to address the bits about it that do actually work, such as the way it keeps money circulating. I'd be very keen to have a big discussion about that topic. But that discussion doesn't involve bitcoin or its spurious claims about deflation.
Last edited:
Thanks. Appreciate this isn't directly a bitcoin discussion so I don't want to derail the thread, but the inflation/ deflation topic does seem to be at the core of at least the bitcoiners arguments, so I thought best to address it with my lame real world microeconomic case.
So in attemt to steer the discussion back on topic:
In scenario A; a consumer mainly buys things that they didn't immeadiatly need because they think they are getting the items cheap and the prices are going up anyway and they might need them in a year down the line when the price will be higher.
Shopping centers are full of peeple like this, buying a fuck ton of shit they probably don't really need and would never fully utilise until the end of its lifecycle. Chances are loads of the consumed items will end up in landfilll and the people purchasing them don't think twice about the environment because hey, they bought it at half the price the items cost a couple of years ago (regardless of the fact they hardly ever used, wore, played with them).
Result: Money's circulating. All jobs intact.
However, scenarion B ; the consumer only really consume things they immeadiatly need and their purchase of these items is only recurring at a rate they consume: things like groceries that they eat, clothes that wear out etc)
Result: money only circulating for things we need. Job loses in the dispensable consumer items market.
This probably is all too simplistic but could then deflation be used as a means to irradicate mindless consumerism?
And if so, what economic tools are available to enable it (deflation)?
Could, bitcoin be this tool - given the trade off between the environmental improvements gained by irradicating mindless consumerism and the high energy consumption of the cryptocurrency?
*Edited to rephrase questions
Last edited:
Consumerism is a sideshow that is certainly worth paying attention to, but the real impact of deflation is on investment, not consumption. Investment in all types of economic activity — labour, machinery, education, infrastructure, You name it. Why bother when you can sit on the money instead and just wait for it to be worth more? It’s that lack of infrastructure etc investment that really hurts you. Once that stops, there is deterioration in the fabric of everything.
Similar threads
