[Chugalug] A comment on the Bitcoin .. fraud
ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 15 16:40:11 UTC 2013
We can turn lead into gold, but I wouldn't touch it afterwords.
As much as Sturgeon's Law appeals, it really has no actual basis, there are
no statistics to back it ('Most Statistics are false', and do go as far to
say 90% of all published materiel is crap, that is most likely false.
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Randy Yates <lpcustom at gmail.com> wrote:
> By the way, I'm not claiming to be an expert in economics. It's not a
> science, despite the claims. I've seen too many economics experts arguing
> with other economics experts with totally opposite views. A chemist can't
> turn mercury into gold by talking about it. A nobel prize winning economics
> expert, however, can change a lot about the economy by simply making an
> appearance on TV or writing an internet article.
> Need a for instance on that. The recent Bitcoin bubble is a direct result
> of news articles and such about dun da da dun Bitcoin.
> I also don't view bitcoins as a viable currency, and if I were an
> economics expert, I'd make a few media appearances stating that. People
> would lose faith in bitcoins....they'd stop mining and buying/selling them.
> The price would plummet. Then I could go buy a bunch. Then I'd get one of
> my colleges to go on TV saying that they are a great investment. The price
> would rise back up, and I'd be so rich I'd never have to read another
> economics book or even look at a number if I didn't want to.
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Randy Yates <lpcustom at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2140 is the estimated year of the last bitcoin I think. Also, bitcoins
>> can be divided into 8 decimal places. If there are 21,000,000
>> bitcoins...you could also look at it like there are 2,100,000,000,000,000
>> units of currency.
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Dan Lyke <danlyke at flutterby.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Stephen Kraus <ub3ratl4sf00 at gmail.com>
>>> > I criticize it because numerous economics professors criticize it.
>>> I don't think you need to look to outside sources for reasons to be
>>> skeptical of bitcoin, on the other hand there are tremendous profits
>>> to be made from bubbles if you can figure out when to get off.
>>> Objects have value because people collectively believe they have
>>> value, but currencies also have the property where too much rarity
>>> means they're no longer usable as a currency. Collector's items aren't
>>> fungible, which means they don't work as currency: You have to find a
>>> buyer for that specific item.
>>> I believe the overall concept is flawed for a simple reason: Currency
>>> supply is capped at at 21 million bitcoins. Over time bitcoins will be
>>> lost, people will die and not leave codes to their wallets, hardware
>>> will fail, entropy occurs.
>>> Which means that the currency supply will, inevitably, shrink. This,
>>> to a point, encourages hoarding, until people lose faith in the
>>> currency and it collapses entirely.
>>> The question is: how far off is that time?
>>> So, yeah, you won't find me playing in that bubble, but if you wanna
>>> soak some suckers on the rise up, no skin off my nose... And who
>>> knows, that rise may last for years and years.
>>> Chugalug mailing list
>>> Chugalug at chugalug.org
>> Google reads my email!
> Google reads my email!
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Chugalug