End of Empire with Keys to Freedom Sanders, Birch, and Berwick https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maob4-Vo1II Pre 10 Years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHVBTAxGd8U
well if we want to kill fiat money we need to win a civil war against the powers that be. It's not just the central bank. On the other hand if govcorp wanted to kill crypto all they have to do is jail/kill a few users and watch support for crypto disappear overnight.
More than a few were jailed and killed and Dark Markets still haven't disappeared. Even if legalized they'd still have support for tax and licensing reasons. Same goes for Fiat itself... no one but the Fiateers actually wants Fiat, they just haven't grown woke enough balls yet to start doing something about it. Though rare in history, Civil Wars of ideology, which is what Cryptocurrency Anarchism are, can be won without mass casualty gunfire. Cryptocurrency is great for personal small businesses, the distributed nature and numbers of them are pointless to kill. Grassroots adoption grows upward. And go head to head in their own lobbying halls. Go multi pronged.
hires murderers and brags about it.
Joint heartfelt statements could embark a new true course, but none were made on the subject, thus any message from them on NAP remains internally conflicted.
putting eggs and metals in the same basket
They all have value on various timescales, quantities, distribution distances, etc.
Same as knowing their storage and movement costs are much higher than crypto.
Are they? Is it more expensive to store some ounces of gold at home than to store private keys? How about the risks? What's the difference between being asked at the point of a gun "where's your gold" and "what's your private key" ?
One issue is that arbitrary quantities of metals occupy linear quantities of physical space, cryptocurrency have no such restraints.
on the other hand yes, as far as transmitting value goes, digital systems have clear advantages. Though of course the infrastructure costs are huge
Bullshit. Add it *ALL* up, *everything* involved in Fiat... Banker and Government salaries, their buildings construction maintenance heating cooling water, their lawmakers, regulators, police, their cars and fuel, servicing companies, health insurance, retirements, their Wars, etc, etc... all of everything that goesinto Fiat, globally, multiple incarnations of them. A complete waste. Then consider cryptocurrency and its few areas of already extremely well optimized tech efficiencies... - Sand (Silicon) - Electrons (From whatever sources) - Internet (Sand + Electrons) Fiat will always be *hundreds* of times more costly and forceful than any set of adopted true cryptocurrencies.
and at the moment the hardware is sabotaged.
No shit. All these cache bugs were spy features. People should fix that and get rich while they're at it too... #OpenFabs , #OpenHW , #OpenSW , #OpenDev , #OpenBiz
'technology' because it's the most dangerous enabler of totalitarianism
Too bad people *still* orgasm over centralized spy and control brain numbing tech. That shit is old school, been there, done that.
sound money ... 'gold standard' ... counterfeited
Not so much. While it's much harder to print gold than worthless fiat paper,
the only way to print gold that I can think of is to use astronomical amounts of energy to synthetize a few gold atoms. So, not practical to say the least.
Gold mining from earth by slave labor and mining tech from secret reserves is essentially printing it, albeit harder than printing fiat. Gold is an element, not a molecule, it can't be synthesized without atomic slow yield and risk, or stellar amounts of energy and time. Mining gold from seawater is perhaps relatively efficient to atomic synthesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold If proof of <whatever> in cryptocurrency is sufficiently distributed among all users, and all users are adherent to not permitting devaluing themselves, both of which are less or more true today, and with the right education, likely to remain true... cryptocurrency will continue to resist falling to these topics.
But \printing' gold leaf? Good luck with that.
Foil in wallet could be interesting. Higher values still require linear weight and space as above.
the secret vaults are govcorp vaults and the gold in them was confiscated after the govt itself destroyed the gold standard. So the problem isn't metals per se but government, as ever.
Which then begets problems of liberating and distributing it, versus alternative issues of creating and distributing cryptocurrencies.
Known issuance crypto beats gold there.
Does it? We may know how many cryptocoins have been 'issued' BUT we don't know if the coins still exist. As a matter of fact bitcoin's case is especially fucked since it is 'believed' that something like 1 million coins may be owned by 'satoshi'....or maybe he lost the keys.
Or, you have stuff like bitcoin cash where it's sensible to assume that ver and bitmain own a good chunk of the 'supply'.
Irrelavant. Whatever they hold is but a drop in the monthly exchange and usage volumes, with any influence on such times of exchange pricing further becoming moot as adoption soaks up more value from other sources such as Fiat.
Also IIRC zcash or a similar system had a 'bug' that allowed for unlimited, undetectable counterfeiting?
Which is why Zcash and others have now researching and deploying some periodic gatekeeping functions.
well divisibility is one of the reguired properties of money (and one of the reasons why eggs or chickens don't make good money).
I take the meat and you the feathers, that's fair division.
anyway, the fact that the distribution of gold, bitcoins or wealth in general is fucked isn't so much a technical problem but a direct consequence of organized crime aka government and government protected businesses.
Gov or not, no distribution method is really fair, and once it enters economies it's anyone's game. Right now in early days, best distribution of cryptocurrency you can ever hope for is to get some now, even a small amount, and keep shifting it every couple years to whatever is leading the adoption board at those times, until five or so make it to true adoption decade from now. Unfortunately this also applies to all the centralized shitcoins that make up much of todays market. Of course if they reach exclusive adoption more than the distributed cryptocurrencies, you'll be as rich, but still remain a slave. That would be sad. Like it or not, cryptocurrency will become a thing. If you want to be free, best teach others which ones to choose.
I mean, I was comparing metals to digital money in a hypothetical free market. Commodity money can be transacted 'peer to peer'. Digital money requires a unique 'ledger' and every single transaction has to go into that ledger. The ledger management may be decentralized to various degrees but there still is one single central ledger.
Yes, serialized tokens, weights values denominations, all person to person p2p... whatever. Yet other attempts at decentralized / distributed digital currencies emulating that seem to have failed technologically to do that. And plenty of centralized ones have both failed tech, and been jailed. The authenticating and resolving process of the Satoshi ledger seems to be necessary magic, at least currently until some other invention. Feel free to link to digital currencies that don't need that. And now such ledgers seem to be reasonably protected with Zero Knowledge sort of advances.
like the lightning network LN
Lots of videos say Bitcoin Core Lightning Network is and will be junk solution and become controlled, censored, tracked.
just for fun, consider auditing a piece of gold leaf, and auditing a crypto system. To make sure you have real gold you do a trivial flame test. To make sure your crpyto system isn't compromised you need to audit 1) the crypto primitives 2) the protocol 3) the implementations 4) the OS 5) the hardware.
Both metals and distributed private cryptocurrencies are relatively equally hard problems to fuck with compared to central single point Fiats. Use whichever combination of the former two suits you.
Actually depends on who can continually create and bank upon marginal advantages over the other.
More like : it takes some time for govcorp to close the loopholes? Overall I don't see any progress being made on the liberty cause, either through 'technology' or any other means.
Of course there's bitcoin and dark markets and plans for prediction markets, etc but in practice none of these things have had much of an impact yet - whereas the global, digital-surveillance police state gets stronger by the day.
As before... you need to push your adoption much faster and harder than your opponent, otherwise yes you will lose. Cryptocurrency, vs Fiat, has wasted *YEARS* of time allowing themselves being distracted by short term riches instead of focusing on long term wealth that comes by pushing adoption.
The technocrats probably do not yet understand what they could actually do by turning their tech to various evaporative purposes.
I think the technocrats are well aware of the countless enhancements that 'technlogy' provides for their totalitarian schemes.
Apple seems to begin to know what it can do with strong crypto in its phones.
Companies like Apple chose to deploy stronger crypto which might in some ways help evaporate the State, the State being a major thorn in Corporate ass too. Now the people must awake to corp control schemes like Facebook too. Apple may yet turn interesting in crypto and open hardware over the long term...
oh yes, the 'strong crypto' on their phones totally and completly LOCKS OUT the fucktards who use crapple products (like roger ver). The only reason crapple uses crypto is to fully protecte themselves from their users and to prevent the users from having any control over crapple's hardware.
Yes, though they easily could be, Apple is not compliant with... #OpenFabs , #OpenHW , #OpenSW , #OpenDev , #OpenBiz
Chickens and gold do have market prices derived from their use as commodities. Numbers on a ledger do not have such a property, hence no 'intrinsic' price.
And in the case of cryptocurrencies, they can be rare, which like stupid non "usables" such as shiny things and art, people have always assigned value to, ie: a price. Like it or not, there is a strange "faith" factor. Rather than get trapped up in attempting to define the exclusive properties of money for some book, let the market sort it out.
they are good at propaganda, but their fraud is ultimately backed by lethal force (you know, soldiers). If govt didn't have an army of cops and soldiers they wouldn't last a week.
You funded them, and taught others to do so, and they took you over. That was stupid. Now you need to doubly raise and fund, and teach others to raise and fund, a different army that will both evaporate them, and not take you over. People say, political infiltration, and defunding through financial route around, may work, and be the only peaceful means left. You can suggest additional or other means.
However any volume_tx and volume_pairing stats will tell you BCH ZEC and all the other cryptos are clearly being used for something. Doesn't really matter what.
If I had to guess,they are used for gambling by greedy retards. Now, that may be fine if ultimately a critical mass of 'assets' end up being transferred to crypto, and when govt attacks it, then the people 'holding' coins have enough of an incentive to fight back. But that hasn't happened yet, ovbiously.
On the other hand there are cancers like coinbase and xapo which are basically very succesful attacks on bitcoins.
I think it can be good as described above, but if that doesn't happen then the gamblers are just dead weight and likely teh sort of retards who want more regulation.
Remains to be seen who and what will win. Grab a few coins and a big bowl of popcorn. This fight is going to have at least a few good rounds. Should be fun.
In the long term, adoption removes their influence. So go adopt.
So, gold bitcoins and chickens =P
Those three would be fine. Though "Bitcoin" is not a good term to teach people with, "Cryptocurrency" is probably best.
so not sure what you mean by 'nonintrinsic negative'? Volatility is intrinsic and is negative...
No it's not a negative thing, it's greenfield early days discovery.
Nah, that may be true in a free market, not in the highly corrupt system we live in. In other words, some of the price movements may be explained by genuine 'market forces' whereas crazy 'volatility' is the result of manipulation by goldman sachs and co.
As before... it's expected, and thus not a negative to see. If Goldman drops $10B in buys across all the crypto exchanges, price will go "crazy volatile" up, same for if they pull out. That is *expected* and *natural* reaction of the crypto markets as they exist today. They were "volatile" when someone dropped $20 in pizza on them years ago. And ten years from now when those markets are the size of Fiat's forex today, it'll take $10T before people can try FUDing that bullshit "volatility" argument. The $USD is only as "stable" as it is because it's dug in N layers deep, including behind derivatives, debt, etc. And all the fucked up Fiats smooth each other out, not just on the forex market, but the geopolitical market as well. And there's a lot of people who still think it's backed by something other than guns pointed at them, so they still throw their hard assets and work into it. If you set say BTC to 1 and look at graph of how much of any Fiat you can buy with it, fiat looks volatile as hell, and dropping long term. OMG Fiat "volatile" they cry, who would ever use that. Bottom line, people are making large moves in a thin market, no big deal...
Though I guess it could be argued that the long term steady rise in price is the result of 'genuine' adoption.
Now if that changes to a genuine drop, which will take roughly equally long term amounts of time to become apparent, then people might have something to say. With Cryptocurrencies now competing with Fiats, people should base their [crypto] currency comparison charts with an accepted commodity goods basket set to 1. ie: $USD dropped in actual buying power since inception.
Gradual adoption would result in a steady price increase. But if you look at bitcoin's price, in realtive short terms, it's all over the place, and more important, it isn't really 'correlated' to anything
It's history is correlated to the usual things - Cycles of news penetration yielding lots of buying - Same buyers discovering limited spending options and selling - Reasonable long and short term speculative moves - Growing background of usage Humans do that. That's normal. Companies rock and pop on stock exchanges all the time, some in a year, some in 100 years.
uncertainty so is not really good.
Yes uncertainty is reflected, but no one can say that uncertainty is *unexpected* at this stage.
And clearly wild price fluctuations are a bad thing for something that is supposed to be used to 'measure' value.
Depends on what you're trading... goods, services, fiat... float times of the transaction... hold times of the traded item... your short and long term projections, interests, goals, etc. Maybe you'd perform 20% of your work, or trade item, for crypto, maybe someday 5% if it was "disposable", or 73% if it was "hodl". Up to you. The whole "volatility" anti cryptocurrency argument [without being coupled with any sort of "expected" explanation] is nothing but a statist FUD play upon the non thinking sheeple to keep them from adopting against Fiat. Beware those speaking it. Do own research. Make own choices.