There appears to be nothing drawing attention to the fact Mt Gox was originally a US football trading card platform which had little of the expected security features seen or required of many financial exchanges, so Mt Gox was a hack waiting to happen. As to whether the Russian was fitted up by others to serve an agenda remains to be seen.
Moral of the story: No, people do NOT want the government out of their way. Turns out that even bitcoin fanbois DO want rule of law, and law enforcement.
The reason money works the way it does is that it's almost entirely logically derived from hard requirements from everyone. Not that "the man" is trying to oppress you.
As a "bitcoin fanboi," I never claimed to not want the rule of law. I just don't want some unaccountable third party mucking about with the monetary policy of the currency I'm using. If anything, I'd like _more_ rule of law when it comes to holding central banks accountable when they fuck up.
How do you avoid unaccountable third parties in a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin? Isn't policy currently being set, in practice, by a mix of the major miners (many behind the Chinese Great Firewall) and core developers, none of whom were elected or are accountable to you in any way? Hell, one of the people with influence over Bitcoin is just some rando who started a popular forum.
People will fight the government with all their might for trying to put in regulation and policy for as long as their own "good fortune" lasts. They think it's natural and possibly a consequence of their own individual abilities.
People will fight the government with all their might for not trying to put in regulations and policy when their own "good fortune" ends. They think it was bound to happen and possibly a consequence of the government's inability.
Most people are more like children than they'd like to admit.
The evidence is there but they lack the willingness to understand it. They will fight you with all their might but when it does come tumbling down on them they will blame the parents for not doing more since they knew better.
Being able to review the code yourself is helpful, and being able to contribute to the code yourself is even better. It may not be perfect, but it's certainly a step up from bankers setting policy in their ivory towers, in my opinion. Changes to the bitcoin source code, as a rule, only happen when the development community has reached a reasonable consensus after public discussion. Then it's left to miners to implement this "policy" by running the software that developers release.
Granted, not all bitcoin clients are run in this fashion, but you mention the core developers, who are held accountable to the community by their reputations. There's something greatly liberating about being able to talk to the policy setters on IRC and have them treat you like any other person, rather than part of the rabble.
Or even if it was a little bit of fairness in how the QE is distributed.
For better or worse, America is the leading example of capitalism in practice. It undermines the whole brand of capitalism when they hand out 4 trillion to the banks then call it a day. Where does the integrity of the system come in to the debate?
That sort of thing was meant to be a hallmark of the communists, not first world nations.
No, unfortunately it's perfectly capitalist. Because the premise of capitalism [1] is (extremely simplified) "help the capital holder because they will have more power to help the others". If an employer does better he will hire more people so more well being.
Another basic capitalist concept is that politics should not influence capital but capital should influence politics. That's because who would know better how to make money and what's best: money makers or politicians? The idea is political interest can turn into unwise economic moves, but capitalist interest will always turn into wise economic moves. Why do you think lobbying isn't considered corruption? Because it's expected that politics needs a hand from business to make the right call.
In practice this turns out how you see it today. The premise was solid, the implementation not so much. In communism state dictates and the business is at its mercy. In capitalism capital dictates and the state is at its mercy. See the QE as quieting up an unruly child by giving him what he wants. What else can you do, get another child? Sink your economy? It's still your own people you hurt in the end.
Idk why you're being downvoted when you're right. I guess people are incorrectly thinking you support this behaviour instead of simply stating how it is capitalist.
People rarely take the time to understand what you're trying to say these days. They're also very misinformed and take it personally when they think you're attacking their "core values". In this case I think it's because I was highlighting some downsides of the practical implementation of capitalism. Or maybe criticizing anything related to capitalism makes me a communist? Who knows...
Very few people actually understand what capitalism or communism are or what they were supposed to be, beyond what quick consumption TV or internet media tells them. Also very few people accept to change their opinions as the facts change. They'd rather fight it.
Good for them I guess... some things really are bliss.
Central banks are audited to a borderline-silly level of redundancy in every major trading economy (i.e. the U.S., EU, Japan, UK, Canada and Switzerland).
The audit is a joke. Just hogwash. What exactly happens if wrongdoings are unearthed? What happens when taxpayers' money is found lost? Nothing.
Pentagon eats up trillions and no one has a clue. Trillions paid out in bank bailouts and no one questions. Billionaires take loans and declare bankruptcy...
Audits performed by those who are involved in the crime is hogwash.
>I just don’t want some unaccountable third party mucking about with the monetary policy of the currency I'm using.
How do you justify that despite the blockchain being decentralized - that at any time, a dozen different people could immediately or long term ruin or muck with bitcoin’s policies and directions?
I’ll also at this time point out it’s a commodity in effect, not a currency really, but different topic.
Your argument seems to be the idealized “it’s open and no one owns it man” and not the reality that the only part that’s “free” is the mathy database part.
Eh, it's not as easy to influence the policies and direction of bitcoin's core client as you might think. It requires consensus building, which is nowhere near as easy as enforcing consensus on the state of the blockchain. It's a messy process, involving much debate and hashing out (pun intended) of details. See here[1] for more.
If it is a commodity, then it's one that's awfully easy to spend on whatever random bullshit I come across on the internet.
It takes a concerted effort but it's definitely possible, especially by those who moderate forums and subreddits. Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Classic and Bitcoin were all successful in doing so, although they each only captured part of the original Bitcoin market cap.
You seem to be confusing the moderation of non-technical forums with the process of achieving consensus between experts on highly technical issues. My apologies if this isn't the case.
The bitcoin forks you name have experts working on their development, true. But these developers represent a small fraction of the number of contributors to the bitcoin core client. As the number of people increases, so too does the difficulty of coming to consensus on the direction of development.
You only need a couple of developers to fork, and they aren't necessarily motivated by those highly technical issues. After that, by moderating forums you can bring the users, which brings the valuation.
Most central banks in developed countries have delivered reasonable moderate inflation over decades. Also, in most developed countries you're free to hold other (fiat) currencies or real assets.
Of course, some countries have huge problems, but if they introduce capital controls, they are just as likely to prohibit you from holding Bitcoin as from holding other currencies.
I still don't see what problem cryptocurrencies are solving here.
They solve the problem of getting money past Venezuela's currency controls at the border, assuming you can find somebody in the country who will accept it. That's not a small if, but it does represent an alternative that would not exist without cryptocurrencies.
But I'm talking more about when central banks fail to react to crises, sometimes only acting months or years after action could be taken to prevent some of the worst aspects of these crashes. Plus the current pervasive distortion of markets due to quantitative easing (and now, the inverse) is seriously fucking with how we value companies. The P/E ratio of most large tech companies is absolutely crazeballs bonkers and we have monetary policy, in part, to thank for that.
As for inflation, the U.S. Federal Reserve can't seem to figure out why inflation is as low as it is with unemployment this low. They just don't know!
Just because something is OK -- and has been OK for a hundred years -- doesn't mean it isn't also massively brittle (not that I'm saying it is). You're committing the fallacy of induction when talking about economics. Dangerous move.
Bitfinexed would like to have a word with you. If Bitfinexs wash trading or printing Tether as fast as they can to prop up the value of BTC isn’t mucking about in the currency you’re using, I don’t know what is.
Solid point, but I'd prefer a permissionless system where any actor is able to have a voice in the direction of policy to a walled garden where wealth appears to be a prerequisite for membership.
Any permissionless system must allow maliciously self-interested actors to act as they please, so long as the underlying soundness of the currency is not affected. The mass printing of tether has no effect on the usefulness of bitcoin as a transaction medium, just a temporary effect on its usefulness as a store of value (and personally, the value of bitcoin seems to be doing just fine). I'm still able to transfer bitcoin from my personal device anywhere in the world in seconds (at 0 confirmations, about an hour for the recommended 6), as opposed to waiting days for an ACH or wire transfer to clear.
Anyway, bad actors are the reason that we need the rule of law in this space. If Bitfinex is as shady as is claimed, they won't be able to get away with their schemes indefinitely.
Don't confuse you not agreeing with decision with authorities not being accountable.
And if you think unregulated exchanges aren't mucking with the market then I have a bridge to sell you.
Bitcoin is deliberately unaccountable. Someone did something we all agree should not be done? That sucks, we decided to mathematically prevent preventions of that.
And remind me, what happened to Ethereum to create Ethereum Classic? And apparently they are going to (or have already) done it again! It's capitalism for the poor, communism for the rich all over again.
And if you think central banks are unaccountable then why haven't they literally stolen all the money? With Bitcoin everything that can be stolen is. Central banks don't literally have armies.
>Moral of the story: No, people do NOT want the government out of their way.
I could go for getting rid of the government in plenty of areas. Your statement seems a bit extreme given the amount of corruption in Medical and telecommunications.
Would alternative control by the private sector be better? There are tons of cases where private control of public services has been bad for the people (jails, schools etc).
I think you still don't want the government out of medical and telecom.
Examples: Your doctor sells you homeopathic remedy (i.e. water) and charges you all the money for it, saying it's real medicine. Oh, you say you'd Google the effectiveness before accepting? Sorry, no government to demand doctors don't flat out lie about what they give you.
Car accident? Sorry, pay everything you have right now or we won't even call your insurance company.
Telecom: Bob, CEO of the only company that sells phone service in your area, hates blacks so you can't have phone service.
You don't want "getting rid of government". You want good government.
Of course "bitcoin fanbois" want rule of law and law enforcement.
Bitcoin is like the ultimate in law enforcement. Basically the only way to get the coin is through proof-of-work and ownership rules are rigorously enforced.
Rule of law and defense of rights and freedoms are things that even orthodox Libertarians recognize as an appropriate role of government. You can want a government to provide those things and also want it to stay out of your way in most of the rest of your life.
Yeah. But my point is that value set A logically implies restrictions on freedoms within value set A, and it doesn't matter how much you want it to not be true.
Really you want law enforcement to find actual financial crime, but there are many people who draw an ABSOLUTE line against the police taking a look at your financial dealings after getting probable cause.
And they have these values at the same time.
Back to bitcoin: People want to use it to get around restrictions on moving money around. Often laws. Then when money gets stolen they want the police because stealing is a crime. This is just another way of saying "I want to follow only the laws I agree with, and others should always follow the law I want them to follow".
But in civilized society you can't just pick and choose which laws to obey.
I'm not saying you, but bitcoin is so full of these people that I'm just so sick of it.
The guy goes on holiday from Russia to Greece and then after being arrested and extradition sought to the USA he's suddenly also wanted back in Russia on a minor charge.
As someone who was born in Soviet Union, I am not surprised at all. A former world super-power will do whatever in can to prevent its citizen from getting into the hands of USA authorities. Especially, if the citizen in question has been working for Russian mafia, which has been known to have close ties to country's government officials. It's very likely he would be released soon after reaching Russia and then killed by something staged as a suicide, because the risk of him opening his mouth is too high.
46 comments
[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 90.3 ms ] threadNo, it was a Magic the Gathering trading card platform. That's literally what the name stands for: Magic the Gathering Online eXchange. MtGox.
The reason money works the way it does is that it's almost entirely logically derived from hard requirements from everyone. Not that "the man" is trying to oppress you.
People will fight the government with all their might for not trying to put in regulations and policy when their own "good fortune" ends. They think it was bound to happen and possibly a consequence of the government's inability.
Most people are more like children than they'd like to admit. The evidence is there but they lack the willingness to understand it. They will fight you with all their might but when it does come tumbling down on them they will blame the parents for not doing more since they knew better.
Granted, not all bitcoin clients are run in this fashion, but you mention the core developers, who are held accountable to the community by their reputations. There's something greatly liberating about being able to talk to the policy setters on IRC and have them treat you like any other person, rather than part of the rabble.
For better or worse, America is the leading example of capitalism in practice. It undermines the whole brand of capitalism when they hand out 4 trillion to the banks then call it a day. Where does the integrity of the system come in to the debate?
That sort of thing was meant to be a hallmark of the communists, not first world nations.
Another basic capitalist concept is that politics should not influence capital but capital should influence politics. That's because who would know better how to make money and what's best: money makers or politicians? The idea is political interest can turn into unwise economic moves, but capitalist interest will always turn into wise economic moves. Why do you think lobbying isn't considered corruption? Because it's expected that politics needs a hand from business to make the right call.
In practice this turns out how you see it today. The premise was solid, the implementation not so much. In communism state dictates and the business is at its mercy. In capitalism capital dictates and the state is at its mercy. See the QE as quieting up an unruly child by giving him what he wants. What else can you do, get another child? Sink your economy? It's still your own people you hurt in the end.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations
Very few people actually understand what capitalism or communism are or what they were supposed to be, beyond what quick consumption TV or internet media tells them. Also very few people accept to change their opinions as the facts change. They'd rather fight it.
Good for them I guess... some things really are bliss.
Central banks are audited to a borderline-silly level of redundancy in every major trading economy (i.e. the U.S., EU, Japan, UK, Canada and Switzerland).
Pentagon eats up trillions and no one has a clue. Trillions paid out in bank bailouts and no one questions. Billionaires take loans and declare bankruptcy...
Audits performed by those who are involved in the crime is hogwash.
How do you justify that despite the blockchain being decentralized - that at any time, a dozen different people could immediately or long term ruin or muck with bitcoin’s policies and directions?
I’ll also at this time point out it’s a commodity in effect, not a currency really, but different topic.
Your argument seems to be the idealized “it’s open and no one owns it man” and not the reality that the only part that’s “free” is the mathy database part.
If it is a commodity, then it's one that's awfully easy to spend on whatever random bullshit I come across on the internet.
[1]https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/
The bitcoin forks you name have experts working on their development, true. But these developers represent a small fraction of the number of contributors to the bitcoin core client. As the number of people increases, so too does the difficulty of coming to consensus on the direction of development.
Most central banks in developed countries have delivered reasonable moderate inflation over decades. Also, in most developed countries you're free to hold other (fiat) currencies or real assets.
Of course, some countries have huge problems, but if they introduce capital controls, they are just as likely to prohibit you from holding Bitcoin as from holding other currencies.
I still don't see what problem cryptocurrencies are solving here.
But I'm talking more about when central banks fail to react to crises, sometimes only acting months or years after action could be taken to prevent some of the worst aspects of these crashes. Plus the current pervasive distortion of markets due to quantitative easing (and now, the inverse) is seriously fucking with how we value companies. The P/E ratio of most large tech companies is absolutely crazeballs bonkers and we have monetary policy, in part, to thank for that.
As for inflation, the U.S. Federal Reserve can't seem to figure out why inflation is as low as it is with unemployment this low. They just don't know!
Any permissionless system must allow maliciously self-interested actors to act as they please, so long as the underlying soundness of the currency is not affected. The mass printing of tether has no effect on the usefulness of bitcoin as a transaction medium, just a temporary effect on its usefulness as a store of value (and personally, the value of bitcoin seems to be doing just fine). I'm still able to transfer bitcoin from my personal device anywhere in the world in seconds (at 0 confirmations, about an hour for the recommended 6), as opposed to waiting days for an ACH or wire transfer to clear.
Anyway, bad actors are the reason that we need the rule of law in this space. If Bitfinex is as shady as is claimed, they won't be able to get away with their schemes indefinitely.
And if you think unregulated exchanges aren't mucking with the market then I have a bridge to sell you.
Bitcoin is deliberately unaccountable. Someone did something we all agree should not be done? That sucks, we decided to mathematically prevent preventions of that.
And remind me, what happened to Ethereum to create Ethereum Classic? And apparently they are going to (or have already) done it again! It's capitalism for the poor, communism for the rich all over again.
And if you think central banks are unaccountable then why haven't they literally stolen all the money? With Bitcoin everything that can be stolen is. Central banks don't literally have armies.
I could go for getting rid of the government in plenty of areas. Your statement seems a bit extreme given the amount of corruption in Medical and telecommunications.
Examples: Your doctor sells you homeopathic remedy (i.e. water) and charges you all the money for it, saying it's real medicine. Oh, you say you'd Google the effectiveness before accepting? Sorry, no government to demand doctors don't flat out lie about what they give you.
Car accident? Sorry, pay everything you have right now or we won't even call your insurance company.
Telecom: Bob, CEO of the only company that sells phone service in your area, hates blacks so you can't have phone service.
You don't want "getting rid of government". You want good government.
Bitcoin is like the ultimate in law enforcement. Basically the only way to get the coin is through proof-of-work and ownership rules are rigorously enforced.
That's the stupidest thing I've heard all week. And it's been a long week.
Really you want law enforcement to find actual financial crime, but there are many people who draw an ABSOLUTE line against the police taking a look at your financial dealings after getting probable cause.
And they have these values at the same time.
Back to bitcoin: People want to use it to get around restrictions on moving money around. Often laws. Then when money gets stolen they want the police because stealing is a crime. This is just another way of saying "I want to follow only the laws I agree with, and others should always follow the law I want them to follow".
But in civilized society you can't just pick and choose which laws to obey.
I'm not saying you, but bitcoin is so full of these people that I'm just so sick of it.
How suspicious is that?