Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[rocks]

The difference is for those 5,000 years your average person understood that "cold hard cash" meaning physical metal was the only thing you could trust and most normal people wouldn't accept paper as payment. This mindset continued in rural America well into the 1900s. Only bankers and governments resorted to paper money and usually it was not paid back in full (in real terms).

Money is not debt, currency is debt. The two are different concepts.

 

[Zarathustra]

Money is a weasel word. The commodity (bronze, gold, silver, grain, whatever) as a medium of exchange (cash) represents just a fraction of the total money supply, which is total debt/credit. Always had been.

If BitCoin becomes the leading medium of exchange, it will always represent just a fraction of the total money supply. The motor of the economy is debt; it's not barter.

 

[sgbett]

BCH and BTC arching downwards. BSV steady.

I'm continually derided on spec subforum in this thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2541338.0;all

Wherein I first suggested the top for BTC was in at around 16.5k, then gave a long term prediction that has played out largely as suggested

Original extrapolation (green/red) based on action after gox era bubble.

When it failed to get anywhere near $16k in the first bounce I made a rough revision (purple line, this was nov '18)

seems to me that this is the rally to ~$9,5k before the final winter (this time with no coming back?)... this is how it's played out so far ... uncanny how the market rhymes... now we see what happens!

 

[cbeast]

Money is a weasel word. The commodity (bronze, gold, silver, grain, whatever) as a medium of exchange (cash) represents just a fraction of the total money supply, which is total debt/credit. Always had been.

If BitCoin becomes the leading medium of exchange, it will always represent just a fraction of the total money supply. The motor of the economy is debt; it's not barter.

Not sure where you get the notion that the majority of money supply has always been debt, unless you count chattel slavery.

 

[79b79aa8]

assume the regulatory burdens are cleared, and private central banking of digital cash is allowed. imagine nonetheless the limitations of the resulting vehicle, inherent and imposed.

bitcoin can coexist with fbcoin. they don't really even compete.

 

[kostialevin]

The dictator is building his team...

 

[Richy_T]

Must be more of those "communication issues" that follow Amaury around.

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

The dictator is building his team...

Never miss a chance to publicly talk bad about your allies.

I don't know, if Amaury tries to Destroy bitcoin cash, of if his ego is just out of control and he never developed empathy or learned how to make friends ...

Even if Craig wright is absolutely fraud faketoshi without any technical incompetence - he would be 100 times more qualified to lead a cryptocurrency project than Amaury.

As someone still invested in bitcoin cash I just hope Amaury goes away for the best it bch. Maybe he will find a job at Facebook, but given his behavior I have a hard time to believe they want him back

Edit: Why is this just a screenshot? Does the original thread exist?
--
ok, found it:

 

[freetrader]

Classic thread.

 

[cypherdoc]

oh brother

 

[Richy_T]

Will they be receiving the blockchain by satellite?

 

[cypherdoc]

this kinda talk will probably jar the Chinese gvt back towards a loosening of Bitcoin regulation:

Some even predict it will further reinforce U.S. dollar’s hegemony. Yao Yongjie, president of Tunlan Investment which has invested a plurality of blockchain startups including bitcoin mining machine manufacturer Canaan, commented,

“To be honest, there’s nothing new in its whitepaper. But it is a good deed for the industry if Facebook and the U.S. can make it. Though China has many prominent crypto teams and talents, regulation pressures have dragged down the development of the industry. What a pity we have to face the dollar hegemony 2.0.”

https://news.8btc.com/china-should-feel-the-threat-of-facebook-libra​

 

[Christoph Bergmann]

Oh, and while I search reddit, I found another pearl. Click to see Amaury's answer.

 

[cypherdoc]

The council will be responsible for standard governance matters, such as appointing an executive team for the association, led by a managing director, and a board of directors to oversee them; setting the top executive’s compensation; and managing the currency’s underlying reserves.

But the body will also have final say over technical questions, such as activating new features to the protocol and resolving situations “where compromised validator nodes have resulted in many signed versions of the Libra Blockchain,” according to the document.

https://www.coindesk.com/theres-a-second-token-a-breakdown-of-facebooks-blockchain-economy

 

[Zarathustra]

Classic thread.

He's wrong. It's a cult. Vin Armani is one of the most active members of that Satan Cult.
[doublepost=1560969946][/doublepost]

Not sure where you get the notion that the majority of money supply has always been debt, unless you count chattel slavery.

In the year 1700, there have been £1'616'839 notes in circulation. At that time, government debt alone was more than 3 million.

 

[79b79aa8]

1. Introduction
Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted third parties to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not really possible, since financial institutions cannot avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical transaction size and cutting off the possibility for small casual transactions, and there is a broader cost in the loss of ability to make non-reversible payments for non- reversible services. With the possibility of reversal, the need for trust spreads. Merchants must be wary of their customers, hassling them for more information than they would otherwise need. A certain percentage of fraud is accepted as unavoidable. These costs and payment uncertainties can be avoided in person by using physical currency, but no mechanism exists to make payments over a communications channel without a trusted party.

What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other without the need for a trusted third party. Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers. In this paper, we propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server to generate computational proof of the chronological order of transactions. The system is secure as long as honest nodes collectively control more CPU power than any cooperating group of attacker nodes.

 

[rocks]

In the year 1700, there have been £1'616'839 notes in circulation. At that time, government debt alone was more than 3 million.

At the time physical silver was traded and considered to be money, not those notes.

In 1700 there was:

• a) Some amount of physical coinage in circulation, likely less than 1M pounds, this is money
• b) 1,616,839 government issued notes in circulation
• c) debt issued to the tune of 3 million pounds

The physical metal in circulation is money. Money cannot be defaulted on, it physically exists. This is also Bitcoin btw.

The government notes in circulation are currency. Currency may maintain its value if managed honestly, but every government in history hits the printer eventually and devalues the currency, sometimes slowly, sometimes rapidly. Currency is not money.

The debt issued represents future promises on either money (physical metal) or currency (government notes). If the debt is issued against money, in times of stress governments always reneg and issue currency to fulfill the promise, this is what FDR did btw.

A monetary system cannot have too much leverage in it, if there is too much leverage then at some point there is a run out of currency (banks, notes, etc) and towards physical base money, which depletes the reserves until the system breaks.

And this is how it worked for 5000 years, if too much leverage was introduced it broke the system. This was how currency and debt was kept reasonable and honest, usually more than a 1-to-2 ratio caused issues.

The invention of central banking changed this.

With central banking governments removed the concept of money and made currency the base supply. Now they could create all the leverage they wanted, because the mechanism which would stop leverage were removed. Now if there was too much leverage and the monetary system couldn't pay out (because lets say goldman sacks is leverage 50-to-1) the central bank could print currency to stop a run.

This printing to stop a run is what as prevented normal mechanisms from keeping currency and leverage in check, and allowed both to run wild. (BTW if you are leverage you are forced to go bankrupt, while governments and banks get bailed out)

The vision of bitcoin I signed up for fixed that. LN would not.

 

[cypherblock]

What the fuck happened to this thread? It used to be fun and interesting to read, now it is full of BSV retardedness. Shame on BU.

Yeah its pretty much a shit show. People are just in the mindset of "we have to promote our coin and destroy the others", not sure why. I see somewhere between 5-100 coins living a long lifespan

 

[cypherdoc]

it's about efficiency. the internet has seamlessly connected us all. and so will a single all encompassing currency.

 

[Richy_T]

There could still be a bit less hate. I mean, it's OK to have a favorite but if it's really the best, it should win on its merits and not because its supporters called the other supporters more nasty names.

It's OK to hate Core though. Bunch of pirates.