'anti virus' scam

True. Yet only $nn.99 per copy, buy now. Learning a little cypherpunk compsec would be a better value.

[what does whoever in crypto stand for and or do]

Cryptocurrency is a little like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CMB_Timeline300_no_WMAP.jpg hundreds of little cryptos and a fuckton of surrounding atoms trying to make it to and through the Dark Ages. Few are in fact honest, holding and transmitting valid philosophy and code embodied. Most are hucksters, self promoters, liars, scams, pointless wannabees, thieves, retards, agents, provocateurs, copycats, shills, statist legacies, banksters, antis, and so on. Who knows which, and who, among them will ring true and survive the tests being quietly set upon them by you. But in a way, they are all bringing forth the message that truly new things, wholesale changes, for the better, are possible. Is that not good. And that you are being given a rare chance, once in a lifetime, in many lifetimes, to sort, choose, and adopt the best and most freeing among them, and to make it happen. Already hundred of ICO's and many fake and shit people have been run out business and publicly excoriated. Is that not the way. And which will be next to that fate, and to endorse to success. You research. You decide. Tell us. Tell the world.

...

Enjoy and spread the Rabbit Hole ;)

More fun and useful than CNN, FOX, BBC, <insert sheeples State licensed puppets here>...

On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 01:17:38 -0500 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:

But in a way, they are all bringing forth the message that truly new things, wholesale changes, for the better, are possible. Is that not good.

Changes for the better are always possible. But there is a downside to baseless optimism. People who think that "blockchain can't be stopped" "bitcoin can't be censored" etc are playing into the hands of their enemies. As to mcafee he probably isn't that naive regarding the weak points of the state but he isn't to be trusted anyway. Mcafee brags about his bodyguards being US military empire child murderers. Think about that. What kind of person would hire the scum of the earth, the americunt soldier-child-mutderer as 'bodyguard'.

One should know roughly where one came from, and consider where one has evolved to today.

Indeed. And I always wondered what stornetta had to say but was too lazy to look him up so thanks for the link.

...

ledger

Ledgers are unfortunate, currently in many regards, indeed. Yet how does one expect to get off the planet by trading chickens, eggs, and shiny things around in person.

heh - you seem to be missing the same point stornetta missed? Right, eggs are not a good "medium of exchange". However, shiny things made of copper, silver and gold, which are called, you know, coins, are vastly superior to any 'crypto currency' in many aspects. Also, being a libertarian I DO NOT give a flying fuck about 'getting off the planet' or 'technology' per se. Or I guess I should say I care about 'technology' because it's the most dangerous enabler of totalitarianism ever. Anyway, it should be painfully obvious that sound money in the form of something like a 'gold standard' helps 'technical development' so your comment goes against pretty much the history of 'civilization'. Bottom line : you cannot beat the 'decentralization' and privacy of trading metals in person, not to mention the fact that metals can't be counterfeited or 51% attacked and trading gold coins doesn't require NSA-backdoored microelectronics.

Distributed technology is and will continue to disrupt and evaporate legacy power structures.

That's mostly backwards. Distributed technology REQUIRES decentralized political power. If power is centralized (as it obviously is) then 'technology' is controlled by a small corrupt technocratic mafia, as it is today.

...

volatility

It's greenfield, any fuck that speaks of this as a nonintrinsic negative is a complete statist closed market control freak fuck.

well, that's yet another problem with 'money' based on a 'ledger'. These ledger based systems are NOT commodity money so their units don't have any 'intrinsic' price. Now, if bitcoin was widely used, then its price would be more stable but at the moment bitcoin isn't really a 'currency'(it's not widely accepted or 'current'), and it's used by gambler assholes who call themselves 'traders' for gambling. so not sure what you mean by 'nonintrinsic negative'? Volatility is intrinsic and is negative...

On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 23:36:02 -0500 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:

Crypto already much harder to kill than fiat, fiat's kill point being exchanges known as local and central banks.

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.

...

soldier-child-mutderer as 'bodyguard'.

He's not hiring them to murder children, but to defend selves against incoming aggression.

The point is that he hires 'ex' child murderers and brags about it. He could have hired other people instead of navy scum.

Ask the military scum their brass and political schemers why they not talk about their murder.

They are all morally responsible. However the soldiers are both morally and materially responsible. But hey if your CV says "imperial child murderer' then you get hired by 'libertarian' mcafee.

It's still a question to be answered though.

...

eggs are not a good "medium of exchange".

They're fine within their limited expiry time, they last longer in the form of hatched chickens.

No, eggs are not fine as commodity money, they pretty much lack any properties that a commodity requires if it's to be used as money. So, putting eggs and metals in the same basket sounds funny, but if you look closely the joke is on you =)

...

coins, are vastly superior to any 'crypto currency' in many aspects. .....

Old news.

Well, my point is that it doesn't seem to be old news for people like stornetta (and a few other crypto cheerleaders)

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" ? on the other hand yes, as far as transmitting value goes, digital systems have clear advantages. Though of course the infrastructure costs are huge and at the moment the hardware is sabotaged.

And that one cannot store them in their brain or other mechanisms like crypto.

...

'technology' because it's the most dangerous enabler of totalitarianism ever.

Duh.

well it's something that the likes of stornetta or the retarded cunt who inverviewd him seem to royally miss.

...

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.

any marked gold issuance marketed as being serialized valuable controlled whatever can be cloned by duplicating marks.

Oh, it may be possible to cheat some people who stupidly regard markings as proof of purity, but that's not a general argument. But \printing' gold leaf? Good luck with that.

And secret under / over reporting of mining and diversions can occur, and no one really knows who has how much existing gold where in secret vaults.

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.

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'. Also IIRC zcash or a similar system had a 'bug' that allowed for unlimited, undetectable counterfeiting?

And any vaults aren't thousand years old, only 10.

They both suffer from infinite divisibility, which makes it unlikely that top secret hoards will be drawn down and dispersed in market by any demand to get various sizes of currency into circulation... they'll just let adoption divide them and remain even larger kings.

well divisibility is one of the reguired properties of money (and one of the reasons why eggs or chickens don't make good money). 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.

...

Bottom line : you cannot beat the 'decentralization' and privacy of trading metals in person

Given the paperwork and chokepoints in both fiat and metals, crypto is actually on par to better than them.

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. Well, unless you use something like the lightning network...but it remains to be seen if the LN will actually work as intended. And p22 channel payments still require onchain settlement.

Yes, in person is different.

...

NSA-backdoored microelectronics.

How many fucking times do people have to be told of the profits and win waiting to be had here before they go and found a few of them...

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.

#OpenFabs , #OpenHW , #OpenSW , #OpenDev , #OpenBiz

indeed

...

...

Distributed technology is and will continue to disrupt and evaporate legacy power structures.

That's mostly backwards. Distributed technology REQUIRES decentralized political power. If power is centralized (as it obviously is) then 'technology' is controlled by a small corrupt technocratic mafia, as it is today.

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.

The technocrats probably do not yet understand what they could actually do by turning their tech to various evaporative purposes.

Nor sure what an evaporative purpose is? =P - You mean to vaporize people? 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.

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.

...

well, that's yet another problem with 'money' based on a 'ledger'. These ledger based systems are NOT commodity money so their units don't have any 'intrinsic' price.

Chickens and gold have no intrinsic price either. Calling something money is nothing more than the process of estimating its past current and future value

except that money isn't created by magically calling something money. 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.

in relation to other things (also money candidates) on a market, and using that data to decide however much of it you want to put in your wallet or warehouse... relatively aka faith.

that's part of the picture. And I don't think there's 'faith' involved in the process.

It's only the fuckery of Governments that tries to assign a value to some so called money other than its true market value.

yes.

Only reason their scam continues working is because they're pretty good at it such that the masses don't lose faith,

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.

simply they tolerate outright theft and evaporation of their money so long as they can still use it to buy beer and tv.

If they woke up, they'd drop fiat for metal and crypto.

true that

Convertible ledgers are fine so long as they hold true. History shows they often turn into scams.

indeed

True cryptocurrency (ie: below) probably won't, however creating or finding one that is true will likely be rare.

...

Now, if bitcoin was widely used, then its price would be more stable but at the moment bitcoin isn't really a 'currency'(it's not widely accepted or 'current')

Mostly duh.

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.

...

it's used by gambler assholes who call themselves 'traders' for gambling.

Nothing wrong with that. Unless you're a statist regulator. So ignore it.

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.

In the long term, adoption removes their influence. So go adopt.

Or stick with chickens, gold and whatever else.

So, gold bitcoins and chickens =P

...

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. Though I guess it could be argued that the long term steady rise in price is the result of 'genuine' adoption. So, we'll see...

For a truly distributed anarchistic privacy uncontrollable uncensored ungoverned known issuance etc cryptocurrency... volatility is expected during run up to full steady state mass adoption,

I suppose that depends on how it gets adopted. 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, despite what all the charlatans and scammer 'experts' say.

thus volatility is intrinsic, or at least uncontrolled for. That's ok. Presence of volatility is a positive thing,

Volatility is the result of manipulation and uncertainty so is not really good. And clearly wild price fluctuations are a bad thing for something that is supposed to be used to 'measure' value. Stating those facts doesn't mean I want to 'regulate' anything =P - and long term, so far, the price has only gone up so no volatility there.

as without seeing it one must wonder what sort of control fuckery is in place making it flatter.

Though part of this depends on whether humanity, and multiple players, when dumped into an open market pot, do or do not, tend to adopt smoothly, or chaotically.

For cryptocurrency in total, chaotically upward seems to be the case so far.

true as matter of fact so far =P

...

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.

The one in Zcash is called "turnstiling" https://z.cash/blog/sapling-addresses-turnstile-migration/ Though there are potential pitfalls that should be questioned... https://z.cash/blog/defense-against-counterfeiting-in-shielded-pools/

On Fri, 16 Nov 2018 05:24:25 -0500 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:

...

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.

That's a good point. Black markets are a form of civil resistance so - good, but they are less than ideal, and necessary small.

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.

Yeah the problem is conceptually simple, but fixing it isn't that simple...

Though rare in history, Civil Wars of ideology, which is what Cryptocurrency Anarchism are, can be won without mass casualty gunfire.

I'm kinda skeptical - we'll have to wait and see...

...

...

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.

True. You can put billions of dollars in some kind of handheld device, or in a piece of paper. On the other hand, that's convenient for people who have billions of dollars, and that's not 'us' I believe. But if wealth was evenly distributed, something which should happen in the absence of govcorp, then relatively small amounts of precious metals should store a fair amount of value.

...

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...

But I wasnt talking about fiat =P - I was comparing cryptomoney to free market commodity money.

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,

Indeed the true costs of using govt money are huge and measured in millions of dead people. I'm pointing out that the costs of digital infrastructure are not negligible either, but granted, a lot smaller than the cost of government, and digital infrastructure unlike government, can be useful...at least when used for good.

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...

Oh of course.

- Sand (Silicon) - Electrons (From whatever sources) - Internet (Sand + Electrons)

Haha, except, in reality, the fabs that use sand as raw material cost 5000 millions each. The transcontinental fiber optic links cost obscene amounts of money as well and all this infrastructure is owned by govcorp. (although we paid for it)

Fiat will always be *hundreds* of times more costly and forceful than any set of adopted true cryptocurrencies.

Indeed.

Too bad people *still* orgasm over centralized spy and control brain numbing tech. That shit is old school, been there, done that.

Yeah no doubt the people who benefit from those schemes are quite happy about them.

...

...

...

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.

Well in that case the problem is slave labor. The profits for the gold 'printer' come from exploiting people not from increasing the gold supply. Thing is, commodities have value as commodities, so increasing their supply always has some benefit, whereas increasing the supply of paper money is simply a wealth transferring mechanism which doesn't add any 'value'.

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

Yeah maybe using 'nanomachines' - Or maybe the amount of energy/time needed to extract gold from seawater is too high/long. Who knows.

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.

Yeah well, the "proof of xxx" schemes aren't completely straightforward. The first and biggest cryptocurrency is backed by tons of hardware and energy usage. Pretty much like gold. Except that unlike gold, cryptocurrencies require constant 'mining' or they cease to exist. It remains to be seen if there's a viable alternative to proof of work.

...

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.

True. In that regard using something that hasn't been monopolized is better.

...

...

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.

lol how is it irrelevant? You can't have it both ways =P

Whatever they hold is but a drop in the monthly exchange and usage volumes,

If 'satoshi' has 1 million btc and bch then he has 1/17 of the whole supply. That isn't exactly a 'drop'.

with any influence on such times of exchange pricing further becoming moot as adoption soaks up more value from other sources such as Fiat.

...

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.

haha

...

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.

Well commodity money in a free market can be closer to fair.

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.

I'm not sure anything is leading the adoption board...

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 guess one can eliminate the vast majority of scams and garbage like ripple...And what's left?

The authenticating and resolving process of the Satoshi ledger seems to be necessary magic, at least currently until some other invention.

Yeah but it really doesn't look like magic. More like a brute force solution.

Feel free to link to digital currencies that don't need that.

Hehe =) - There isn't any as far as I know and that's my whole point.

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.

So sounds like you didn't do any research at all? "jewtube videos say" - is that your argument?

...

...

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.

That's a lot easier to say than do. The majority of stuff that gets 'mass adopted' is based on fraud and force. So it's 'adopted' because people are forced to use it. After people have been forced to use mainstream garbage they have little interest in better stuff.

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.

Hm. I don't think there's or there ever was a critical mass of people who can 'push adoption'. Not many people involved in crypto, and a few of them are 'crypto anarchists' or even close.

...

...

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,

lol - are you saying that with a straight face? What the fuck are you talking about.

the State being a major thorn in Corporate ass too.

dude. The state and apple are two sides of the same coin. What the hell are you talking. about.

Now the people must awake to corp control schemes like Facebook too.

oh but hasnt fukerberg 'deployed' 'strong crypto' too? You know, signal, funded by the US govt.

Apple may yet turn interesting in crypto and open hardware over the long term...

are you drunk ?

...

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...

not compliant? They are the exact opposite and enemy of #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.

The properties required for good money are not elusive. It's a well researched subject.

Though "Bitcoin" is not a good term to teach people with, "Cryptocurrency" is probably best.

why not

...

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.

It may be expected but that doesn't mean it's good.

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.

it may be 'expected' - but again it's not good. As to 'natural', well sort of. It's 'natural' for GS scum to do that sort of thing just like it's natural for other forms of cancer to kill organism I suppose?

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.

I don't think it's bullshit and I'm certainly not using it to convince people to stick to govt money.

The $USD is only as "stable" as it is because it's dug in N layers deep,

of course. And again I'm not comparing crypto to govt money.

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,

yeah that's a good point, or at least half of it. Because if you looked at all the rest of prices denominated in govt money you would see less volatility. Prices of ordinary stuff don't jump 20% overnight, all of the time.

and dropping long term.

Indeed.

OMG Fiat "volatile" they cry, who would ever use that.

Except as I mentioned the prices of all goods and service measrued in govt money are hardly volatile when compared to crypto.

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.

Notice that the long term uptrend is NOT volatile. So far, in the long, term bitcoin has gone up, by a lot.

With Cryptocurrencies now competing with Fiats, people should base their [crypto] currency comparison charts with an accepted commodity goods basket set to 1.

Do that and you'll see big daily changes in the price of cryptocurrencies against your goods basket.

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.

'normal' means shit. 'normal' is what sheep do on average.

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.

yeah well : expected uncertainty isn't good either.

...

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

lol - as far as I'm concerned I can point out a weakness in cryptocurrencies without being a statist...

play upon the non thinking sheeple to keep them from adopting against Fiat. Beware those speaking it.

Do own research. Make own choices.

dude. The state and apple are two sides of the same coin.

Corp hates expenses... - having money forcibly stolen from it and wasted on other things (tax) - having to spend bribery money trying to get what it wants (lobby), sometimes wasted by other corps doing same and by crooks in office It's not a coin, but a fuckery tryst that got suckered by Gov. If People and Corp joined team voluntaryist and dismissed the State, they both win in that regard, and keep status quo between them. At least until People learn those 2 new profits were passthrough pricing and start trying to claw it back from Corp.

oh but hasnt fukerberg 'deployed' 'strong crypto' too? You know, signal, funded by the US govt.

Facebook owns whatsapp's implementation, not signal. Signal has less direct influences... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Whisper_Systems#Funding They're tools... create, evaluate, use, and fund, as desired, or not, your call.

"if pigs had win they might fly".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWvevkE0kAI