|
CassandraZara posted:This is the most childish way of looking at investing. I'm sure you think that an actual product somehow makes stock trading completely different somehow, because that's also a childish thing to think. Bitcoin's economy is entirely negative-valued. It takes vast amounts of resources to run an incredibly inefficient network. It generates, per se, nothing of economic value from this transaction network; this isn't Visa or MC granting credit or converting a ledger on an account into a good or service at a retailer with a swipe of a card. All the wealth it generates by definition must come from whatever another person has "invested" directly into bitcoin. Since the dunning-krueggerands it generates aren't accepted by the local power company, nor are ASIC manufacturers currently accepting bitcoin for custom made chips, there's a massive outflow of capital from the "economy" to maintain this. This isn't dumping a million dollars into a third world country so it can build a plantation, because that at least promises productive economic activity; it's sending money into a Madoff-like scheme so the current holders can cash out and pay the bills. There's no circle that creates wealth -- it perverts even the most optimistic belief in capitalism and turns the "economy" into a game of fygm.
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 14:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:19 |
|
|
i think hes choosing option e but i saw him roll his character stats and know he didnt get 20 focus
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
kw0134 posted:Nah, because the fact there is in fact an actual product is why it's different. If I buy Google stock, it's because I believe the services Google provides is worth value, will be worth value to someone later, and will profit when that economic activity materializes. I can also short Google stock, on the belief that the product is shoddy and some hotshot new competitor is going to knock them down; either way the activities of the companies in question are meaningful. In short, there's an actual economy to think about with stocks. Not all stocks behave this way, as is the case with penny stocks, which exist so suckers can bet on them for the most part. I mean yeah what you've said is correct and is why it is ultimately unsustainable forever, but if it lasts for an extended period of time, with many average Joes hopping on board and cashing out, then what's to differentiate it from - say - a regular investment into a company that subsequently abruptly collapses due to adverse market conditions or some catastrophic event (see Knight Capital or GT Advanced Technologies)? You're still out your money in an instant. I've got no dog in the Bitcoin fight at all, but people have been predicting it's total collapse and how everyone involved is a fool for years now...
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
The primary issue is that none of what Uranium has said makes this, in any way, not a scam. Fundamentally, it is a scam because the capital outflow of Bitcoin has been exclusively negative; people have paid for mining machines and electricity to acquire Bitcoins, and the only USD inside of Bitcoin as a system is what was used to purchase those mined Bitcoins, meaning that there is necessarily less money in that system than all people who invested originally had. Again, this is not impossible to make money on. Nobody ever said it was; you very much can make money off of it, but in doing so, you are scamming other people. That is where the issue comes in, for me. Saying something to the effect of "Well, these people know what they're getting into, it's fine for me to make money off of it" and the like does not clear you of blame for scamming others. If you simply do not care that what you are doing is morally reprehensible (Bitcoin certainly isn't illegal, currently, so that's not a factor you need to worry about.) then you may feel free. Like I said before, though, if you're willing to fundamentally gently caress idiots over for money, there are way better ways to do that than Buttcons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
The market will be irrational for however long it will be; there are plenty of fools in the world, after all. In the event if you want to gamble, then one should be aware that you've equated an exogenous risk that would have been difficult to predict with a hazard that's literally built into the "product." I don't know when the music will stop. If I did, I'd use this vast power of precognition to buy lottery tickets. I am confident saying though that someone's gonna be left holding the bag, and the chance of that it's you being victimized is definitely zero if you don't touch the poop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
personally i think the 5 dollars of electricity the inventor of bitcoin used to mine a million bitcoins really is worth 5 billion dollars because reasons
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:in general when you are no longer sure of what you are even discussing with someone else follow the chain of the links in the quoted replies or in this case you can simply go to the top of the page. i essentially implied bitcoin is a scam. you disagreed because... people can make money at it. ok that doesnt make it not a scam. people make money at scams all the time. the thing is you dont want to be holding the bag when an event collapses the confidence that is the only thing holding the scam up IBM just partnered with a non-profit blockchain project called Stellar to make cross-border payments faster and easier https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/16/ibm-has-a-new-blockchain-for-banks-to-speed-up-cross-border-payments.html Ripple got funding from the Gates Foundation to develop an interoperable payments platform that will make financial services more available to unbanked people https://ripple.com/insights/ripple-the-gates-foundation-team-up-to-level-the-economic-playing-field-for-the-poor/ OmiseGo is another project that's trying to improve e-payment systems and expand access to financial services in southeast Asia by allowing easy exchange between different currencies and payment platforms that are traditionally siloed from each other. it's being developed by Omise Holdings, which is already established as a payment processing company in the region, so i believe they have a good platform to launch from. they have support from the Thai Ministry of Finance and Central Bank. one thing that gives bitcoin value is that it's the primary asset used to trade these other crypto assets which are better suited to solve problems that bitcoin cannot. i don't know whether bitcoin will succeed long-term in this role, but for now, it dominates the crypto market. i believe that most of the potential for growth in the crypto market lies in non-bitcoin projects.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:i don't think it's a scam because i don't think that bitcoin was designed with malicious intent  Uranium 235 posted:one thing that gives bitcoin value is gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:Fundamentally, it is a scam because the capital outflow of Bitcoin has been exclusively negative scam implies intent to deceive, and i think bitcoin was probably developed sincerely. obviously that is impossible to prove
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:if its developer didnt mine 5% of all the bitcoins there would ever be right off the bat it would almost be worth discussing its intended design which can be represented as a sort of pyramid i think the fact that crypto projects are finding real-world adoption suggests that it was probably not developed as a scam
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:i think the fact that crypto projects are finding real-world adoption suggests that it was probably not developed as a scam
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:i just used technology that was developed for travel into space. that suggests that im an astronaut
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:that's a dumb as gently caress analogy Amazingly Tang, (It's a Kick in a GlassŪ), also had civilian applications, but the key difference between powdered drink mix and bitcoins is that powdered drink mix is not used as a laundering intermediary to get your RansomWare scambux into your non-bitcoin wallet
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:people paying money for them. that is what its value is based on. there is no need for abstractions using other coins that acquire value the same way
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:that's a dumb as gently caress analogy  and no it expresses that adopted purposes are unforseen by those developing something for its intended purpose and not indicative of its intentbut besides that blockchain is not bitcoin. bitcoin is a scam Uranium 235 posted:if you have to buy other coins using bitcoin, and demand increases for other coins, then demand increases for bitcoin  in the world. "no need for abstraction with other coins? well take this abstraction with other coins!"
gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Waffle House posted:Amazingly Tang, (It's a Kick in a GlassŪ), also had civilian applications, but the key difference between powdered drink mix and bitcoins is that powdered drink mix is not used as a laundering intermediary to get your RansomWare scambux into your non-bitcoin wallet
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:metaphor i don't think it's right to say that the adopted purposes of projects like Ripple and Stellar are "unforeseen" by the developer of bitcoin, since they're doing exactly what bitcoin was developed to do, just better your analogy sucks because i'm not saying that i'm a blockchain developer because i use bitcoin. of course you aren't an astronaut just because you use technology that was developed by NASA. what you said is not analogous to what i said quote:not enough Uranium 235 fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:well the thing these coins have in common with bitcoin is the very core of what defines bitcoin: decentralized networks verifying and settling transactions on a distributed ledger "what bitcoin was developed to do" ah yes it will be much easier for you to argue bitcoin is not a scam if you take other things which have an explicit virtuous purpose and directly apply to that to bitcoin by declaring that it was developed to do the same thing. blockchain is what they share and is a tool devoid of inherent intent. bitcoin is a scam. try not to mix these up too much astronauts did not develop the technology to enable astronauts. the relationship is not bitcoin developer:bitcoin::astronaut:space travel technology. yikes (and metaphor )Uranium 235 posted:not sure what your problem with this is since
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:you have a serious problem identifying what is being said. other things having commonalities with bitcoin does not make bitcoin not a scam. seems like we're talking past each other. is this even worth continuing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
You do not have to have malicious intent to scam someone else. Please see my original bridge analogy; whether you believe this item has value or not, it doesn't, and whomever gets hosed over has been scammed by you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:You do not have to have malicious intent to scam someone else. Please see my original bridge analogy; whether you believe this item has value or not, it doesn't, and whomever gets hosed over has been scammed by you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:36
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:scam absolutely requires intent to deceive, it's part of the definition of the word No, it requires deception. Having deceived yourself does not immunize you from running a scam on somebody else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:scam absolutely requires intent to deceive, it's part of the definition of the word "It's not a scam, I tell ya!" - Bernie Madoff "Oh, well, if there's no intent to deceive here, then we're just fine." - Everyone in his fund
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:if the concept and technology underlying bitcoin is being adopted, then the concept and technology has value
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:You do not have to have malicious intent to scam someone else. Please see my original bridge analogy; whether you believe this item has value or not, it doesn't, and whomever gets hosed over has been scammed by you. I pointed this out with your bridge analogy: in that scenario you have an explicit scammer, and I used my "But there's no Mr bitcoin that benefits from me using bitcoin" example and you ignored it. So let me be explicit: In the bridge analogy, the person selling a bridge they do not own knows they do not own the bridge and are scamming $5 out of someone for something they do not have. You have decided that bitcoins are as worthless as the bridge that guy is selling so that somehow selling a coin is the same thing as buying an imaginary bridge from a scammer, because you feel they are both things that don't exist and involve you losing money. That example sucks, it's not a good comparison because the scammer is intentionally, knowingly selling something they do not own in the bridge example, and in the coin example it's people trading in something you consider without value. The two are not alike.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:are you able to distinguish blockchain and bitcoin? they are 2 separate creations. 1 is an implementation of the other. have you seen anyone say "blockchain is a scam"? tbf i'm pretty sure it's mostly a scam these days, though the scam is selling consulting hours for technology that can't ever work right or be useful
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:have you seen anyone say "blockchain is a scam"? divabot's book has a detailed answer to this. It's a buzzword plenty of shysters are leveraging when attempting to sell a product as a business solution and rarely has a legitimate usage for the business/product in question (i.e. blockchain technology isn't bringing them any advantages they don't already have with a centralized database system).
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
 guys guys im trying to reduce the number of facets of discussion between me and him. necessarily so i can maintain my sanity
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:
sorry, but  note how he stops halfway through the gag, to explain the gag
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Uranium 235 posted:. we're still left with the question: did the developer sincerely believe he or she was creating something that would have value to people and could be used to solve problems? we can't really answer that definitively, barring a confession or a discovery of journals or something Is this relevant though considering that Satoshi never meant for it to get this far and it was just a proof of concept thing? Assuming I'm remembering right ofc. It's not like he's guided the BTC path at all in any capacity beyond the initial "here's this thing I made" and whatever his intention was that doesn't change the present reality of the situation which is that large mining conglomerates basically control BTC and decide what happens. COMRADES fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
The lack of a Mr. Bitcoin who directly benefits(Untrue, fundamentally; Lord High King Satoshi does benefit immensely from increased investment in Bitcoin, whether you believe he had malicious intent or not)is generally meaningless. The whole point of the analogy was that you can scam someone without knowing you are scamming them or having any malicious intent whatsoever, and this is still a scam regardless of your sincerity. Sincerity does not make a worthless product have worth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:02
|
|
|
Has anyone said proof of dork yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Coinpricetrack/status/919971630482317312
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:The lack of a Mr. Bitcoin who directly benefits(Untrue, fundamentally; Lord High King Satoshi does benefit immensely from increased investment in Bitcoin, whether you believe he had malicious intent or not)is generally meaningless. The whole point of the analogy was that you can scam someone without knowing you are scamming them or having any malicious intent whatsoever, and this is still a scam regardless of your sincerity. Sincerity does not make a worthless product have worth. How is the guy knowingly selling a bridge they are 100% aware they don't own simultaneously not knowing they are scamming or having malicious intent? They know they do not own the bridge, they are relying on the gap between the buyer paying them and going to collect their rightful bridge rights as the part where they vanish, and that's what makes it a scam. When you trade for bitcoins you get bitcoins, the person trading them has these coins and gives them to you for something else, the person receiving them gets to keep those bitcoins, and that's different than the bridge example.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
no scams will happen there i'm sure. is there a NigerianPrinceCoin yet?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
i have vouchers for coins. you are interested. you make an offer for a coin at $17.13 for 1 coin. after the exchange you inquire as to how much the coin is worth i say "apparently $17.13" the bridge deed/voucher/bill of sale essentially works the same way. youre expected to sell it to someone else or take the loss i didnt even see the original comparison but i can reason what it must have been based on how bitcoin works. neither the bridge or the "coin" has an inherent worth by merit of what those things conventionally are (bridge a physical construct, coin a commodity backed by govt or having material worth) gary oldmans diary fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
Blade Runner posted:No, it requires deception. Having deceived yourself does not immunize you from running a scam on somebody else. to be clear, i'm talking about the developer of bitcoin. i think he intended to create something that would have utility (and value because of that utility). i get the impression that you're trying to move down the chain of responsibility and talk about people who trade bitcoin
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
gary oldmans diary posted:are you able to distinguish blockchain and bitcoin? they are 2 separate creations. 1 is an implementation of the other. have you seen anyone say "blockchain is a scam"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
i would take "accidental scam" just because i dont care about how it became what it is when the discussion is about what it is im not concerned if the original inventor of snake oil really did think it was a cure-all (although that perfectly demonstrates an undeniable scam used while original intent remains ambiguous) Uranium 235 posted:bitcoin is an implementation of blockchain combined with a decentralized network and distributed ledger. it's not just blockchain technology. when i say "concept and technology underlying bitcoin" i'm referring to these things together, not just blockchain
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:19 |
|
|
Ham Sandwiches posted:How is the guy knowingly selling a bridge they are 100% aware they don't own simultaneously not knowing they are scamming or having malicious intent? They know they do not own the bridge, they are relying on the gap between the buyer paying them and going to collect their rightful bridge rights as the part where they vanish, and that's what makes it a scam. Ham Sandwiches, this is lawyer. Buy bitcoins.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2017 18:48
|
|