Your Bitcoin will charles worth exactly zero, as you'll have no way to cash them in. A single machine would produce as many bitcoins per day as the entire planet's collective computing infrastructure. Let me give you a round-up below the cut. Banks used to issue their own currency, then eventually governments miners to awards themselves monopolies in currencies so they could manipulate them to their liking. I have no doubt that there are individuals with great personal Bitcoin fortunes, but have no stross of knowing how that compares with the traditional economy. Well, Stross have learned since then. TFA bitcoin really counter Miners arguments much besides arguing about carbon footprint, but charles BTC is small bitcoin even if you care about such things.
Lack of regulation can easily be fixed. We're currently in a regime where the currency traders have a massive influence fluctuate , plus a deflationary bubble: Lastly, Stross points to a random blog post by a cloud engineer from the UK about how Bitcoin is a nuclear weapon designed to take out the global banking system. The US government has been fairly effective at tracing Bitcoins used in illegal transactions. Even though I'm not an economist more of an engineer , it seems to me from what I've read economics that the point of money is to circulate.
Miners already make transactions and seem to work. Or will the current trilogy put you into an stross darker mood? Bitcoin is tiny, and is already charles massive resources during meaningless busywork. They also tend to conflate the ideas of saving and hoarding so while Bitcoin encourages the latter, they believe that's the same thing as the former. So you're saying massive widespread charles of bitcoin would eliminate the need for the gigantic hashing bitcoin that bitcoin stross, a network that supposedly dwarfs bitcoin computational miners of all top supercomputers in the world combined?
Over the centuries, people hoped to profit from schemes to mint small change during shortages -- sometimes legally, sometimes not. Bitcoin is the Bizarro-world mirror image of that. Expensive, a plaything for the rich, easy to produce, but inherently deflationary. There is a constant, though: However, like the variable value of a penny, there appear to be ways to tame it. Of course, those methods will cause Bitcoin to lose its comparative advantage in the black market and among ideologically-motivated speculators.
Too bad, so sad. I am a great admirer of your work, so it really pains me to see that you've made this post based on fundamentally inaccurate information. Your primary assertion "Mining BtC has a carbon footprint from hell" is based on untrue 'research' published by the site bitcarbon.
Bitcarbon based their entire calculation on a wildly-inaccurate, very outdated guesstimate of power consumption they found at https: Clearly neither Bitcarbon, nor your source, made any effort to verify this number despite a note at blockchain. This totally undermines their data and brings all of their claims into question. The fact is that the hardware that Bitcoin transaction processors are using today is x more efficient than it was a year ago.
Although the difficulty of the work is increasing, the power consumption is not. In addition, far less power is being lost as waste heat. Moreover, any financial network has operating costs.
It costs billions merely to print banknotes. What does it cost to store and transport them securely? What is the cost of running a bank with all its physical branches and staff?
Do you also wish them to "die in a fire"? Bitcoin can be considered as a currency, traded among banking accounts for financial transactions on the currency market BTC China, Kraken, all are currency marketplaces, not "bitcoin banks".
Or it can be considered as a money, traded in exchange for goods and services. Currently, the currency aspect dominates, which creates the volatility.
Most currency markets have a dampening effect because the currency is backed by a money, and the free-flowing currency is usually small compared to the GDP of the associated economy. Not so much with Bitcoin.
As if the monetary economy around Bitcoin develops, it will come to dominate the flow of currency, and that's when the deflationary effects kick in. We're currently in a regime where the currency traders have a massive influence fluctuate , plus a deflationary bubble: Unless you get enough uncertainty in the system to break down that deflationnary bubble.
Whereas the bitcoin miners seem to me to have motives closer to the coin-clippers and forgers of old. Pity we don't have someone of the calibre of Sir Isaac Newton hammering their asses. Uh, Charlie, this is satire? I read your supposed-drunken-charlie-turd-tweets, so I'm not entirly sure about it.
Anyway, satire or not, I'm ok with you going Trotskyism and I'm eagerly awaiting the re-release of accelerando under the guidance of the fifth international!
All right, perhaps not a False Flag. But very convenient for a certain reactive mode which may involve destroying even more privacy to save the economy from the horrors of Bitcoin. Also may facilitate intelligence cooperation between Western countries and China, which is not a good thing.
Damm me to - thats the next genre to "borrow" for the laundry the "cosy catastrophe" obviously a post case nightmare green book. Maybe mutant variants of skunk plants mutate and start wandering around Amsterdam - maybe that Dutch guy from avid could get promoted. The super-skunk they sell in Ams is definitely toxic, yes: Yeah, I think I need to file that away for a rainy day. I'm taking a day off writing today, but expect to pass the halfway mark on Merchant Princes 8 some time on Saturday.
I'm not even convinced it is more valuable as a bitcoin miner or a spambot - I suspect the spam activity would be more remunerative. There is enough bitcoin for everyone to use.
So this idea of there not being enough for people to spend is logicaly false. This was the only economic point you had. I'm all for supply and demand free markets. The alternative interventions are evil. Bitcoin is one of those things that never quite made sense to me. That we don't really know who invented it, it seems too good to be true and everyone is flocking to it makes it seem like something straight out of a fairy tale.
And fairy tales seldom go well for foolish mortals. Really, BTC allows them to emerge? Because there were not markets for assassins, drugs, or child-porn before BTC? Generally my opinion is; while BTC has many flaws, I think competeing currencies are a good thing economically. We need more, but are stifled by the central-bank monopoly.
I hope BTC opens the door for better things If your pub accepts btc, I'll buy you the first pint from the 0. Bought them a year ago via a swiss paypal account via a now defunct german bitcoin trading site, which was registered in London and had its account in poland.
Come to think of it, that's a good question. How are people paying for illegal stuff on the net now? This is something I never even wanted to risk googling but if child porn rings are turning a profit, someone's paying them somehow and it ain't in hand-written IOU's. Do they use credit cards? Aside from the unforgivable ick factor of what's being bought and sold, there's an interesting technical problem here.
The total amount of bitcoins is fixed. However, if you use it as a money, i. Read the pointers given by our host on inflation and deflation to see what a change in that ratio does to an economy. One of the points which is sold as a "very good point" is that the monetary policy of the Bitcoin Central Bank is hardcoded, and cannot be changed except by an unlikely consensus of almost every bitcoin software user and writer.
Conversely, an unflexible monetary policy Right now, it's not a problem. It's not a problem because there is NO Bitcoin economy sphere; every single bitcoin actor customers, sellers operate in a sphere where alternate payment methods abound and in fact dominate their economic function save for all those "bitcoin lotteries!
Win thousands for cents! So those alternate moneys stabilize the non-existent bitcoin economy. I find this development interesting: You will note that most credit card transactions go through two agencies -- Visa and Mastercard -- who are easily leaned on not to handle payments for stuff governments disapprove of.
Paypal are similarly problematic. Any centralized lending or credit agency is vulnerable to a single point attack, and banking regulations are the fulcrum.
I'm not happy about payments to wikileaks being blocked by governments leaning on credit card agencies and Paypal. But I am totally cool with governments not allowing markets in anonymous assassination to emerge. Note that this is an essentially political issue. The key problem with bitcoin is that it erodes the power of states to regulate. Which might look nice at first wrt. Bitcoin is currently being used as part of the ransom payment scheme in the CryptoLocker Malware scam, and directed at lawyers in British Columbia, Canada.
The scheme eventually requires a money-laundering vendor, and so brings bitcoin onto the radar of folks who worry about money laundering.
Said people in BC are, of course, inclined to listen to enraged members of the Bar ;-. If the nuisance starts being life- or wealth-threatening, then it becomes "interesting" to crown attorneys and police forces. It is central planning e. Do you even have a definition of libertarianism? Do you hate left and right libertarians equally? Or maybe geo-libertarians are the true evil? Force from the top is evil. Bitcoin strikes me as useful in confronting libertarians with the consequences of their theories.
It turns out that a truly unregulated market in money is epically boom-and-bust, intensely unequal, full of crooks, a means to make crime pay, and a quick way to lose your shirt.
With regard to the criminal mining use of malware to mine bitcoins I think this will this will almost completely disappear in the near term. Due to the changing nature of the complexity of the bitcoin mining process, the ability of commodity hardware to mine a dollar value of bitcoins in a week is so low that mining bitcoins is likely not an efficient use of a compromised computer.
If I were a cyber criminal and I had a couple hundred computers I would likely be able to make more money with the computer sending spam or engaged some other type of fraud click fraud comes to mind but it could be whatever That I think you will see very little of that criminal misuse going forward. With regard to bitcoins being investment currency.
There seams to be an endless legions of investors in the bitcoin thrall and they are all missing the point. The value of bitcoin is going to go up and down but in an unpredictable manner making it a poor investment.
However, as a transaction currency it can work very well. If the volatility issue moderates it will have a huge impact in micro transactions and other types of web transactions. I see it as a potential PayPal killer. The comment this is a reply to is borderline for a yellow card. I'd appreciate it if the visitors would take time out to review the moderation policy; it might save us some annoyance later One of the thing you need to understand when trying to use "untraceables bitcoins" is that every amount is fully traced.
Someone paying with bitcoin a shady site full of child porn will have the transaction from a wallet he uses to a wallet the porn operator uses visible for essentially the entire existence of Bitcoin. Once the Feds unwrap something like Silkroad, they get the number of the wallet where your bitcoin ended, and can trace back all people who sent bitcoins. So the police notices that the transaction chain goes from Silkroad to Kraken, they send a subpoena to Kraken to identify who did the transaction crediting your initial wallet, and you're done.
This is kind of a "money spent on space exploration could have been better spent on more worthwhile things" kind of logical fallacy argument, but I read that the raw computation power used for mining bitcoins is now exa-obscene and, granted, we already waste a lot of monies on video games and horrible movies. Couldn't we expend that computing power on more worthwhile projects?
Anyone have an idea how many protein folding solutions, or controlled fusion simulations, or BEC spin resonance scenarios, etc. You should probably get more acquainted with the concept of "Level 3 Assets" since we taxpayers have assumed such a large stake in them. A Level 3 Asset is priced indirectly by a model, which can be proprietary. That is, the value of a Level 3 Asset can be pretty much whatever the binary black-box code I wrote say is is, all this is legal and fine with GAAP!
Now, during the financial crisis, banks could deposit these things with central banks as a collateral for new loans - which effectively means turning these things into real money. Knowing how the banks operate it is logical that they would hurry up and produce as much as these things that they possibly could while the going was good.
Then deposit at the FED, in return they get proper bonds, that trade on a real exchange, and they are "capitalised" again. If one checks with ISDA, who keeps a sort-of check on the unregulated derivatives market, indeed the "value" of the derivatives increased during and after the financial crisis. My current theory is that bitcoin is designed to cull libertarians from the herd.
Get them using a fiat currency, then show them the power of deflation. Your argument makes two claims: Claim 1 is probably true, as long as the purchases are not illegal donating to wikileaks was not illegal but merely blocked.
The US government has been fairly effective at tracing Bitcoins used in illegal transactions. That is, they know you donated to wikileaks, but they can't prevent you without charging you with a crime after the fact. Claim 1 does not imply Claim 2. I've talked to some US banking regulators and they don't think taxing Bitcoin is a serious problem. In fact when compared with cash or valuable objects such as gold, Bitcoin is far easier to trace and tax. Everything would be easier for the IRS if tax dodgers switched to Bitcoin.
The question is not if you can tax Bitcoin, clearly you can, the question is at what point does it make sense to tax Bitcoin. Do you tax each time bitcoins move from one wallet to another? If so at what exchange rate. I worry that you may be confusing the political ambitions of Nakamoto with the actual realities of Bitcoin. About black market online payments now, here's an interesting overview from Brian Krebs from back in May. For discussions of dark payments in the physical world, take a look at Loretta Napoleoni's Rogue Economics - http: For example, one direct effect of the Patriot Act was greater difficulty hiding large transfers of cash in USD.
The first order unintended consequence was a drive by the Colombian drug cartels into the Euro. The second-order consequence was new business relationships between the cartels and the 'ndrangheta.
The third-order consequence was increased distribution of cocaine across Europe. The Krebs article is an illustration of Napoleoni's core argument: You're being more tolerant than I would with a drive-by who's being actively personally insulting. Bitcoin is not not necessarily going to be more computationally expensive to generate. The difficulty could also decrease in the future or it could remain the same as it is now.
Also, the electricity is not wasted, it provides integrity and security for the entire bitcoin payment network. How much resources do you think banks spend to keep their deposits safe from hacking and physical theft? Do you also consider those resources wasted? It's not easier otherwise, everyone would do it. It's maybe cheaper, but it's also illegal and can land you in jail. Mining BTC's on stock computer is also not very effective and the profits will decrease in the future if the difficulty of mining would rise.
Botnets make very small portion of the mining market. As stated above, cpu mining is very ineffective and can in no serious way compete with mining on specialized hardware ASIC chips. Bitcoin lack of regulation is a myth. You write about china regulating bitcoin in this very article. Bitcoin lacks central authority but this in no way means that it is somehow extempt from our legal framework. Drugs should be legal anyway so i consider drug markets one of the good things bitcoin enabled.
Ever tried to ship some illegal weapons via mail service over borders? Bitcoin is like cash. I agree with you that it is relatively easy to avoid paying taxes using cash or bitcoins. There are two solutions: Bitcoin actualy helps with this solution as every transaction is already public in blockchain. It makes no sense. If people did more of those activities, there would be no harm as those activities are not limited resources.
They are limited so we want them to be utilized effectively. We don't want rich people to squat large areas of land or lucrative buildings in city centers without using them properly. As a bonus, with limited resources you can easily keep track who owns them and who should pay taxes on them.
You also keep the financial privacy. This would be my preffered solution. Bitcoins are created by smart people and there is a sort-of inverted NSA-ish logick in creating anonymous money that has the path the money took embedded into it every time it is "spent". Like placing a GPS chip with memory in every dollar bill, but much cheaper and less prone to whining from the people who support potential terrorists by being against surveillance. To be honest, I rather think our gracious host may be missing the positive side of experimental currencies, and of tax avoidance measures of all kinds.
Experimental currencies are good because they keep the idealists poor and the libertarians are kept thinking. Tax havens or tax dodges are similarly a good thing because they limit how much tax a government can extort. France is currently re-discovering the Laffer Curve; the UK is a net beneficiary here as quite a few rich French businessmen are decamping to these shores to avoid excessively stupid and greedy taxation.
All Bitcoin does is gives the over-taxed a greater plurality of ways of avoiding tax, whilst remaining rich. If you remove these ways, then two things happen.
The aspiring rich quite often simply give up on the idea, and the government then loses these potential tax revenues entirely. Other more criminally minded people go into politics, and the political sphere then starts to resemble modern Russia, where politics, money and criminality are inextricably linked. It all really comes down to how you keep a government honest, and the only way thus discovered is to allow citizens to legally escape taxation if they but expend some effort to do so.
Any other path seems to lead to eventual ruin. I think OGH is getting a tad bored with writing non-stop, and decided to take a break and see what he can flush out of the woodwork. And boy, is it working. This isn't quite the answer to your question, but addresses pieces of it. In fact, "how do we deal with the money from our completely illegal enterprise" is a huge issue, and back in the s the U.
Bitcoin is ideal tool for a task like this because despite the fact that it is "anonymous", as soon as one account become "dirty", all the related accounts can be easily tracked and if some of them is associated with real person somehow then bah!
The power figure you are quoting is wrong by a factor of at least It's based on the data on this page:. In reality some miners will be more or less efficient. This is based on GPU mining, which hardly anyone is doing any more.
Most people are using ASICs and a more realistic power figure is Watts per gigahash, and the most efficient units are 0. The Laffer curve is of course unrelated to the matter of tax dodging and tax avoidance. I've been following the Bitcoin saga on and off for over two years now.
I have no idea how it keeps going. All the points brought up in the article are the same things I've been seeing sensible people say about Bitcoin from the beginning. And yet it keeps gaining an odd form of legitimacy. Someone's going to write a hell of a dissertation about it in a decade or two, I think.
I don't think it's a deliberate operation to bring down the banks, though. Before the first craze hit it was just a cryptographic toy, a "hey look at this" program. Then the libertarians got a hold of it and made a community around it. It's about then that Bitcoin goes nuts and starts on the boom and bust cycle we see today.
As for the future I'd like it to go down in flames, but every time it has so far it rises again a few months later, like a phoenix born from neckbeards and fedoras. I've given up trying to predict when the inherent problems are going to catch up with it. Now I'm just hoping my dad doesn't get involved Actually, it looks like I may be mistaken, they appear to be basing this on bitcarbon, which says:. I think the yoyo is very profitable and somebody figured out that no ammount of reality is going to make the true believers go away So every crash is an investment opportunity Even the bankers issuing subprime loans and bundling them as CDOs and similar instruments tried to kid themselves they were helping people buy their homes.
I just snorted my dumb brewed tea. Bitcoin may well not be the answer, but I would very much like a transaction mechanism that is anonymous and not vulnerable to simple theft. I am personally sick and tired of stores collecting my purchasing information. I don't want to have to go to ATMs to get cash that could be stolen. Those criticising Bitcoin for its 21 million max property have missed a few things.
If your design criteria for a currency is a p2p system with no central authority, then the way to bootstrap it leaves you with few options. Halving the reward every four years is a very elegant option, and in some ways the only one that really works. But this is such a complex system that I just don't have the energy to elaborate on it here, since I think I came to this party way too late for anyone to listen.
I have studied Bitcoin extensively for over three years, and I believe it will be as big as the internet in how it will change things. Of course it will bring out scary things, such as assassination markets, but the genie is out of the box, and the benefits are huge compared to the drawbacks. Again, compare it to what people said about the internet when it hit mainstream! So, the Gini coefficient is high. It is not OUR fault that you guys didn't pay attention until now.
But the whole discussion is stupid. Bitcoin is a niche currency, why does it matter if it isn't evenly spread over the land to everyone? I think this will boil down to what the primary terror was for each person in their formative years.
If you grow up with weak and ineffectual government, you want someone to come in and protect you from the bandits and corporations that are abusing you.
If you grow up with strong government, you may see them as the problem and want the free market to come in and save you. We'll always be familiar with the failings of the current system and only see the marketing brochure for the new system, not yet knowing what the shortfalls will be until we make the switch. Bitcoin is also a major Economics fail. With a mildly inflationary currency, there is a really good incentive to invest in new business, expansion, etc - if you just sit on the money, it slowly loses value, but if you invest, you may be able to make money, or at least stay ahead of the inflation curve.
With a deflationary currency, there's no longer the incentive to build that new factory, launch that startup, buy shares in a company, take a risk - just sit on the currency and it becomes more valuable for loose definitions of valuable, in the case of Bitcoin. At least with gold, mining more gold creates some jobs, and the increase in difficulty is probably closer to linear Having said that, starting a competitor is tempting.
Just make sure to mine the easy stuff for yourself first, then sell it off as the suckers move in. It's really only the techno-libertarian types that are interested in bitcoin.
As a group libertarians tend to be rather conservative when it comes to ways of storing wealth. You'd find gold and land is much more popular. Or ammunition, with the survivalist types. And while civilization crumbles under the death rays of the evil bitcoin empire.. Mark Zuckerberg alone still holds more money in his piggybank than the peak bitcoin market cap. I haven't seen anyone mention my favorite nickname for Bitcoin, courtesy the commentariat or possibly the host, Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism: You said "Laffer curve".
Put it another way: This may be a feature, not a bug, in your weltanschauung, but I for one would prefer to be an average citizen in a social-democratic utopia than a billionaire cowering behind barbed wire in a hellish kleptocracy. The BitCoin pattern of repeating peak-and-crash has some interesting implications.
Let's say there's two types of buyers: True Believers and Speculators. The True Believers plan to buy and hold until the crypto-currency utopia comes true; the Speculators plan to sell as close to the top as they can. We start with low-value BitCoins, and assume both types drift in at equal rates.
As more people invest, the value starts to climb, drawing in more people in the usual bubble pattern. Then it bursts -- bad news, random fluctuation downward, whatever. The price starts dropping. At this point, the Speculators start to sell, but the True Believers see only cheap coins, and buy instead.
The price bottoms out when all the Speculators have left the market, and the cycle repeats. The whole system acts as a mechanism for the Speculators to extract value. Finally, the Bitcoin buzz has been getting on my tits all week; it was time to strike out. If one did computation in a building requiring heating, and if the power was nuclear, then it might be a reasonable way to keep warm at low carbon cost.
As to the rest, I'm still not sure bit coin is money rather than commodity and alarmed at the idea that money is a commodity. Well yes, that would appear to describe Disaster Capitalism as currently practiced in the western world quite cogently. We're in the midst of the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich since the s.
Probably since the 19th century. Guessing the CIA released bitcoin to distract bugs like me from gold and silver - get us to sell our metals to keep prices down and replenish gov't stockpiles so they can pay back Germany's gold, then crush the bitcoiners in a burst bubble. This nerd deleted my comment, and is against free and open source software?
I bet you use a mac, fascist. I was just providing the people any easy way to dispose of their coins to fuel the fire that bitcoin can die in. Bitcoin wasn't created with a political agenda, it was created as an easier way to send money online. That's like saying that SMS or Email was created with a political agenda. So are you going to be a wiener and delete this comment again, or try to make actual disscussion?
What are your thoughts on dogecoin? I keep seeing " a computer is not very efficient in mining BitCoins" as an argument against malware mining. The authors seem to be conveniently forgetting that malware ideally does not target "a" computer.
It targets "every possible computer accessible". If you get thousands or millions of machines to do something inefficiently, it starts to get much more efficient. Google uses thousands upon thousands of relatively cheap rackmounts to do supercomputer-style parallel calculations.
Malware mining is a fabulous deal for the perpetrators: If you want to exercise your free speech rights, go get your own blog. Charlie, you really should consider switching from a mac to a computer that respects your freedoms. Use of proprietary technologies like those that come from apple restrict your freedom and don't really allow you to use your device to the fullest. I suggest checking out some operation systems listed here - https: Yes Charlie, definitely switch to one of those distros if you want to spend all your time tuning the operating system and not working While it's true that these operating systems are not the childrens toy equivalent of computers like macs are, most people with at least a fifth of a brain can use one.
I would reccomend trisquel to the more "simple minded". I quit a decade ago; found I prefer an environment that helps me Get Stuff Done, rather than endlessly recompiling kernel modules. Grandmother, eggs, sucking thereof: Charlie, why would you ever quit doing gods work?
Did they nsa pay you to stop fighting for electronic freedom? Your relatives probably don't wan't you to spend all day smoking pot and playing video games; in some cases they will over-estimate just how much of a bad thing that is.
Pretty much every libertarian position can be understood in that frame of restrictive but benevolent authority being the root of all 'real' problems. It's a rare parent who literally tortures their kids, so torture is, at best, not a 'real' issue, not a priority.
But many make them do stuff for their health, so mandatory health insurance is a big deal. Pretty much no parents kill their child with drones, many read their diaries. So to libertarians, Bitcoin is like wages from a fast food job as opposed to an allowance; lets you buy what you want without someone else having a veto.
Only money that doesn't judge you can be considered entirely yours My sense was that the earlier spike early this year was driven by speculators. Thus the impact of Chinese regulation.
The "deflation" argument only bites if there's a full-on bitcoin economy, and I don't think we're any closer to that than we were on bitcoin's first day. One model of "bitcoin success" is as low-friction cash, accepted as alternative currency more or less everywhere.
In this form the fixed supply doesn't matter, because most users are buy-here-sell-there-immediately. The people who are holding big pools are one-time winners, much like anybody who got in on the ground floor of something. People who bought Apple stock in , etc. I guess the point is that the value of the system is very dependent on external factors. It will wind up fitting in somewhere. This is a boring position to take in a political argument, I know. On the other hand, the unbounded capital cost of mining is pretty damning.
Regardless of whether that one carbon article was accurate, it is still true that there's an arms race to burn money on mining. Well, Bitcoin is volatile, at least partly because there aren't many people trading it. I'm sure there will be many more ups and downs. It will be more interesting to see what it does long term. I think the main problem for it will be that states are likely to outlaw exchange between it and their currencies, like China did.
Other than that you're mainly blaming Bitcoin for crimes commited using it, as they wouldn't otherwise occur. The policy of central banks maintaining a low rate of inflation is not so great if you're not clever enough to do trading in high return, high risk investments.
As it is, it is currently very difficult to save money as savings accounts do not pay enough to beat inflation. In theory a currency with a fixed supply would deflate at exactly the rate of economic growth, which would be harmless and beneficial for savers. Charlie 23 Libertarianism, like Leninism, is an attractive, internally consistent ideology which provides a prescription for achieving a utopian society populated entirely by frictionless perfectly spherical human beings.
Or so it is said That is the problem, as stated by OGH. Looking at your classification of what should and should not be taxed, I am not sure that I want to find out the consequences of your proposals. Yes, you're correct that land and physical property are a different sort of resource, but I have heard enough stories of the ills arising from a dependence on land taxes.
I'm not sure just what you mean by "property". Is it limited to assets fixed to the land, such as a house, or does it at the other extreme include the pen in my pocket? Are they to be taxed on acquisition, or is there an annual payment? Frankly, having had to deal with some of this sort of thing at the bookkeeping level, I'd rather have an income tax system, as a matter of practical administration.
How do you even assess the value of real estate, just as a starting question. There's quite a few points you make which don't sound crazy. They can be argued about. But when you play your final card, you suddenly look as honest as the poker player who produces five aces.
The "miners" are physically situated inside the USA's domains. Even of they are now, they won't be if what you suggest looks like happening My hats off to you for having the vast brass stones to fight libertarians on the internet. I agree completely that BitCoin is ridiculous.
I especially wonder if the whole thing is funded on a myopic nerd-boy assumption that people are ready to and should trust algorithms rather than governments. Mixing reinvented for your privacy Chip Mixer. An articulate and lucid take-down of why Stross has lost his edge. Regrettably, he was one of my favorite authors as well, but it seems the time for that has passed.
That's okay, there are plenty willing to take his place. I'm not surprised about Stross's stance. His book Accelerando was an attack on hyper capitalism and over reliance on markets. The only fault I see with Stross's critique is the Botnet thing. Time will tell if it has a future or not. I have had too many sour moments caused by the current system, so I'm probably biassed towards bitcoin. I really don't care if it gets bigger or not, I'm already enjoying the properties of it and I'm glad that it works and there are "bright ones" who work on making it better.
That was my favorite line. His so called "civil" society can kiss my ass and fume all it wants over the fact that I'll never pay taxes on my btc. Life as a permanent tourist is a pretty good life. Stross is right on all points he makes, but apart from the 'carbon footprint', which I believe is a non-issue in the global scale of things, every point he makes is either already true for other currencies, or positive for society, rather than negative.
I agree, except for the carbon footprint, which may be small compared to present day banking infrastructure most probably, but very hard to estimate , but still feels completely wasteful.
I'm sure there must be working protocols without such a waste, we just have to think harder. Indeed I feel that something like Proof-of-Stake or Proof-of-Burn or some combination of them should work. The details seem very tricky though. We probably need some more new ideas here. I was actually going to ask if the petro dollar died, or at least phased out to a large extent lets say through green energy renewable etc..
Would the cost of mining be greater than if we kept the current petro system? Interestedly enough, his newest book "Neptune's Brood" features an economy where bitcoins are used on an interstellar market in order to move wealth from one system to another.
I agree with most of the things he cites, I just think they are good things instead of bad things. The global fiat system is crappy, and it's why countries like China want special drawing rights, to leave the USD behind, why the USD gets seignorage, the fact that China is a currency manipulator, Argentina can keep dodgy official statistics, bail-ins on Cyprus banks, and on and on. Not untraceable but a lot like gold coins that you can instantly send to the other side of the planet.
Carbon footprint, who cares. The waste in the current system is already huge. Mining is not super profitable necessarily, so hopefully people dial back a little and learn not to get too crazy about mining for bitcoin profits.
Borrowing someone's PC to mine bitcoin is just about completely not worth bothering with. You could get, what, 2 cents a day? Surely you could write better malware than that Cryptolocker. Gresham's law might show up later when everyone is trying to get you to take fiat but you only want bitcoins. Bitcoin driven out of the market because everyone wants to keep it, as the prices go up and up and no one wants your paper. Unfortunately for economic liberals like myself, that group isn't the group to first make up a decent cryptocurrency with global reach.
They had no incentive to do it. The only groups that would have the incentive to make a deflationary, extremely counterfeit resistant, anti-central banking, anti-Big-Corrupt-Government see pressure against Wikileaks donations digital currency would be extreme libertarian cypherpunks.
There is a ton of circle-jerking going on in those comments. I'm not even going to spend my time arguing with them. It would be nice to retort his either irrelevant or continuously regurgitated deflationary spiral points but I gather it would be a waste of time as apparently he reserves the right to delete any comment that disagrees with him. I stopped reading there. If someone writing for a publication can't be bothered to write proper English, they're not worth my time.
I'll give him that at least he is well informed of how the cryptocurrency works, even if I disagree with him in some points he makes. He isn't retarded, he just have leftist political agenda. I like his novels, but just look: So essentialy he is hurt that people can establish free markets and goverment can't take their money.
Truly - scary idea for the leftist. They don't become 'the operations don't become progressively harder as the bitcoin space is explored,' whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
News articles that do not contain the word "Bitcoin" are usually off-topic. This subreddit is not about general financial news. Submissions that are mostly about some other cryptocurrency belong elsewhere. Promotion of client software which attempts to alter the Bitcoin protocol without overwhelming consensus is not permitted.
No referral links in submissions. No compilations of free Bitcoin sites. Trades should usually not be advertised here. For example, submissions like "Buying BTC" or "Selling my computer for bitcoins" do not belong here. New merchants are welcome to announce their services for Bitcoin, but after those have been announced they are no longer news and should not be re-posted. Aside from new merchant announcements, those interested in advertising to our audience should consider Reddit's self-serve advertising system.
Do not post your Bitcoin address unless someone explicitly asks you to. Be aware that Twitter, etc. Related communities Sorted roughly by decreasing popularity. Welcome to Reddit, the front page of the internet. Become a Redditor and subscribe to one of thousands of communities. This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.
Want to add to the discussion? D Most funny comment: The bitcoin people are about to get a harsh lesson in why you want a central bank.
Bitcoin's future relies on regulation. Pretty ironic, isn't it? You're a libertarian, I suppose. You are also assuming every bitcoin user is a libertarian. It really makes you look intelligent.
Economics are also driven by maths, eh? I guess opposing opinions are trolls? Are your arguments that weak? I need all central banks to die ASAP. Enjoy the rollercoaster ride while you can. Those requirements are how the currency should be managed. In other words, regulation. Being issued by a central bank.
Inflation needs to be controlled renember Zimbabwe? Most currencies are backed by goods, in other words, the capacity of a country. The exchange rates have to make sense.
7 Jan Stross makes some typical arguments against Bitcoin: it wastes electricity; bad money will push out good because it will be more profitable for botnets than legitimate miners; it's deflationary; it is semi-anonymous so it enables crime; it's a conspiracy by Libertarians to take over the world. But do any of them. · Why Charles Stross Doesn't Know a Thing about Bitcoin.. authors who influenced me was Charles Stross.. will come to dominate Bitcoin mining. Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes 'SF writer Charles Stross writes on his blog that like all currency systems, Bitcoin comes with an implicit political agenda attached and. 28 Dec What about the normative economics? Well, you should read Charlie Stross: BitCoin looks like it was designed as a weapon intended to damage central banking and money issuing banks, with a Libertarian political agenda in mind— to damage states ability to collect tax and monitor their citizens financial.