awt

When are they going to stop using fixed dollar amounts in laws as if they didn’t know in a decade $200 will be worth way less than it is now? Kind of a slap in the face.

I think we may not be understanding each other.

How do you sell a fork if you aren’t holding it first?

Holders of Bitcoin also have a say in what forks are viable.

If your bitcoin is being stored on a machine connected to the internet, it’s not your bitcoin.

> People complaining that bitcoin is just for crime are just slandering it.

This one really gets my goat. There are so many ridiculous laws. It’s illegal to consume alcohol in Saudi Arabia. It’s illegal in Russia to use profanity in theaters, and in Thailand it’s illegal not to play a salute to the king before every film. Besides geographical differences in current times, the differences throughout history are more striking.

Also, no one is talking about taking down Twitter, which is where the Dayton murderer hung out.

8chan is not the problem. Deplatforming 8chan is shooting the messenger.

>For example, all present-day populations show about two percent of Neanderthal ancestry which means that Neanderthal mixing with the ancestors of modern humans occurred soon after they left Africa, probably around 50,000 to 55,000 years ago somewhere in the Middle East.

I thought subsaharans lacked Neanderthal admixture?

Also it has a government enforced monopoly.

It will and is. Every time the US attempts to control what can be purchased with dollars, it advances the process of turning the USD into a kind of Chuck E. Cheese token.

I think it would be great if China accomplished some major software and hardware innovations.

It should also deflate as the economy grows. Wrt the problems of deflation, it may or may not cause some, but it doesn't really matter because people who don't want to participate in Bitcoin don't have to. They can still choose to use inflationary stores of value.

Uninflatable store of value.

Please provide a definition of harm that excludes the violation of property rights. We need not consider the difference between private property rights and property rights because these things are one and the same.

If you can come up with a logically consistent definition under which the creation of public property does not itself cause harm - I will be surprised.

I don't understand how you can compare violation of property rights (breaking windows) to a completely voluntary system such as Bitcoin, the private production and use of which violates no property rights.

Money laundering and tax evasion: also known as failing to pay the men with guns for "protection."

Stalin was also quite sure he knew what was useful for humanity.

Who decides what is extreme? Abolitionists were extreme yo!

Saying Bitcoin is like one thing does not preclude it from being like other things. Never the less, it's not necessarily useless just because it doesn't have the use some people mistakenly thought it had.

The point is not that Bitcoin is a government bond, if that wasn't obvious, but that just because some people said it's a currency and proceeded to build failing businesses on that faulty premise doesn't preclude it having actual, unrelated uses, such as a store of value with a vastly different risk profile than any other asset ever known.

Government bonds are stable if you ignore tail risk. Governments tend to collapse eventually, at which point your bonds are not a great store of value.

Bitcoin is however similar to a government bond in that it a) has value, b) is not directly useful for consumer transactions. Also, I dunno that behaving like money can be put in such stark binary terms.

That's what the Papua New Guineans thought.

What it was "meant to be" hardly matters. What it actually is is more important than the misrepresentations presented by various misinformed parties.

I don't see the relationship between "meant to be" and "is" here. Doesn't it only matter what it actually is rather than what some people thought it might be?

Government bonds have been around for hundreds of years but I can't buy coffee with them. Thus they don't do anything.

Bitcoin is a cult. Altcoins are cargo cults.

How could Gresham's Law apply to Bitcoin if it were not divisible? Or are you suggesting that comic books could be considered money (one property of which is divisibility) to the same degree as Bitcoin? Hopefully we agree that divisibility is not an "ostensible" characteristic of Bitcoin, but a "factual" characteristic of it?

Also your tendency to define things in binary terms (liquid/illiquid, value/no value) is troubling.

Why the struggle to pretend not to be able to tell the difference between Bitcoin and limited edition comic books?

What principle is not being universally applied? Or do I misunderstand?

Although this is a true statement it is not persuasive in that Bitcoin (unlike a special issue comic, or any other rare thing) has specific, meaningful properties (fungibility, divisibility, durability, etc.) that interact with the world according to well known principles (Gresham's Law, Lindy Effect, Theory of Computation, Network Effect, etc.) that must be shown not to apply in order to disqualify it as the best available store of value.

It is indeed a piss-poor store of value for people who have high time preference, but unmatched for those with low time preference.