Bitcoin....who's gotten into it?

[Danno]

Explain, please.

uh...

Attachment 246449

[Mustonen]

Seriously bro, it's as easy a quick run down to the local foreign currency desk at the Venezuelan Reserve Bank in Caracas, which I'm told has excellent retail services for transferring local paper into USD for a modest fee. 24/7/365 Maduro's homies are ready, willing and able to give you USD any time you need. Yep. Nobody in VZ/TUR needs crypto. And that's why we don't hear any reporting about profligate and gov't sponsored activity in the crypto space in these countries.

Good thinking

Right. Because a shopkeeper in Caracas is going to buy bread at the market with fucking bitcoin.

[DBdude]

Dumb ass weak hands just lost all their BTC to big money insiders (many probably associated with GS) who just bought the dip.My aim is to change the world's financial system as much as it's to make some cheddar. Not sure how leaving my BTC with a "trusted third party" is safer than my Trezor in terms of regulatory seizure.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

no dumb ass, the news is that goldman doesn't see a future in it

but you are smarter than they are

[Mustonen]

You must not read the news. I eagerly await more updates on this parallel universe you speak of.

Uh, this one?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.087117341b38

Or are you talking about the meaningless gesture of pegging their currency to their own crypto?

Seriously. My contention was that your average Venezuelan who wants to buy some food will prefer dollars over bitcoin any day of the week, because guess what? When your economy is in shambles you’re looking for something stable that you can easily exchange for goods and services. That isn’t bitcoin. It is the dollar. There is nothing currently in play to disrupt this simple fact, ESPECIALLY in developing markets. If there is, please point to it and we can discuss the relative merits. Cryptocurrency isn’t for the underbanked. That’s a laughable and easily disproven claim. It sucks for anything other than speculation.

[stalefish3169]

Hahaha. So GS news declared by GS CFO to be "fake news" today. Lulz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkXj...ature=youtu.be

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

[Mustonen]

USD is black market in Venezuela. The only people that have them get them illegally from people outside the country. If we're talking about a sustainable methodology for Venezuelans to use currency, crypto is a workable solution. People use a variety of cryptocurrencies in Venezuela to buy and sell goods every day, read about them. Pretending as though they don't exist and the commercial use case isn't valid is asinine.

People eating meals don't care if their food was bought with USD or crypto, they just want to eat. This mission of trying to disprove something that's already being validated in troubled economies has me genuinely confused. Do you not understand that people can and do use crypto for commerce in places where local currencies are unstable? Do you not understand that USD is not a valid use case for millions of Venezuelans? It's fucking banned. They don't have USD in the country's foreign reserves. You can't just sub out bolivars for USD at the bank, it doesn't work like that.

Two things, I guess. (1) You offer a normal Venezuelan either $100USD or $100 in BTC, which do you think he takes? (2) the only currency not banned is the bolivar/petro. You can’t just sub out bolivars for BTC at the bank either. Forrealz.

Not looking to disprove anything. Just trying to stick to reality and an honest discussion of the merits.

[Mustonen]

Hahaha. So GS news declared by GS CFO to be "fake news" today. Lulz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkXj...ature=youtu.be

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

So, is this validation for you? Or is this still reverso world? Can we care now? Or do we still despise GS? Having a hard time keeping up....

Also, went and listened to the broader interview (which was interesting) and what he said wasn’t that they were all in on crypto, but that they recognized it as a commodity, and when it was realized that their position was effectively a shrug from the get-go, the perception was corrected. So, not sure where that lands you in your bizarro world, and I’m having an increasingly hard time giving a shit.

[garyfromterrace]

Crypto is arguably easier to acquire than USD.

Really? Isn't for me. Not sure that it would be for a working class Venezualan.

[dunfree]

Do you not understand that people can and do use crypto for commerce in places where local currencies are unstable?

actually, most people don't view this as truth. they view crypto as a way to transfer $ to something more stable. example, poor performance of fork.

if you live your life in an online circle-jerk cryptos the thing. that isn't the developling world case for poor people.

[Mustonen]

1-USD for sure. But theoreticals have no bearing on whether or not crypto can and does work for the people there. The biggest hindrance to wider USD or crypto utilization is govt regs, but if you remove the bans on *either* the public wouldn't care as much about which vehicle as they would care about having a vehicle {remember.... econ = the science of scarcity & impacts on behavior}. For Venezuelans, scarcity is so acute they could benefit tremendously from universal adoption of crypto.

Scarcity of what? Crypto? What you said here doesn’t actually make sense.

And some are benefiting from its usage today. A Lexus is nicer than a Tercel, but with my job on the line i DGAF what drives me to work, I just need to get there. Preference is superceded by necessity in these countries, and that necessity is something that will not dry up so long as fiat money is in use. And so long as the necessity of crypto as a store of value/monetary exchange vehicle exists, the blanket cvntery of "LOL CRYPTO" will ring as an ignorant song.

Necessity of crypto? It doesn’t do anything that the $usd doesn’t. If the core issue is stability and availability crypto loses across the fucking board.

2-Crypto is arguably easier to acquire than USD. Exchange of USD is obviously easier, but you haven't established that USD is a viable method of payment for the average VZ citizen. They *don't have the option to choose* ergo the necessity of crypto. And hence the objection to your summary dismissal of crypto as a legitimate commerce/value tool. It's just objectively false if you look out the window at what's happening in the world today.

Give some evidence that it’s easier. Also note that my core premise was that your average Venezuelan would MUCH rather have $100USD in their pocket than $100 in BTC. You admitted that is true, but you’re still arguing about....something.

[Mustonen]

The beauty of my position is that it's not dependent on 'most people' 'online circle jerks' or random canadians high on scotch. For people that do not have access to stable fiat, crypto is an opening to normalcy. So long as fiat networks undergo periodic collapse, crypto will be in demand. So long as it's in demand, there is an objective use case. We can argue about relative degrees of utilization, and in the US it's absurdly low for obvious reasons, but to deny the objective reality of a durable economic need is to lie to yourself.

Crypto is in demand because currencies can collapse? When did THAT become the premise of crypto? I mean.... crypto can’t collapse, so I guess.... no wait.

The basic problem with your bullshit above is that crypto doesn’t do anything the USD doesn’t, and everything it does do it does worse, and that doesn’t change. You can believe that BTC is going to go to the moon. Great, maybe it does, but it also crashes every few months, and that fucking sucks if you’re trying to put aside a few bucks to fix your motorcycle. If you’re truly looking for a long term store of value and you don’t have fuck around money bitcoin is even worse. Speculation is not for a farmer outside Ankara.

[stalefish3169]

I understand the math. What I don't understand is the statement that BTC is literally backed by math.

Explain, please.

This is a short part of the history around private/public key cryptography. BTC is backed by math because there are many years of mathematical principles baked in. It's much harder to circumvent these than it is for a couple of back room cigar smoking pricks to rig the Libor rate or start up the next round of QE.

From Wikipedia:

..."In 1976, an asymmetric key cryptosystem was published by Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman who, influenced by Ralph Merkle's work on public key distribution, disclosed a method of public key agreement. This method of key exchange, which uses exponentiation in a finite field, came to be known as Diffie–Hellman key exchange. This was the first published practical method for establishing a shared secret-key over an authenticated (but not confidential) communications channel without using a prior shared secret. Merkle's "public key-agreement technique" became known as Merkle's Puzzles, and was invented in 1974 and published in 1978.

In 1977, a generalization of Cocks' scheme was independently invented by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman, all then at MIT. The latter authors published their work in 1978, and the algorithm came to be known as RSA, from their initials. RSA uses exponentiation modulo a product of two very large primes, to encrypt and decrypt, performing both public key encryption and public key digital signature. Its security is connected to the extreme difficulty of factoring large integers, a problem for which there is no known efficient general technique. In 1979, Michael O. Rabin published a related cryptosystemthat is probably secure as long as the factorization of the public key remains difficult – it remains an assumption that RSA also enjoys this security.

Since the 1970s, a large number and variety of encryption, digital signature, key agreement, and other techniques have been developed in the field of public key cryptography. The ElGamal cryptosystem, invented by Taher ElGamal relies on the similar and related high level of difficulty of the discrete logarithm problem, as does the closely related DSA, which was developed at the US National Security Agency (NSA) and published by NIST as a proposed standard.

The introduction of elliptic curve cryptography by Neal Koblitz and Victor Miller, independently and simultaneously in the mid-1980s, has yielded new public key algorithms based on the discrete logarithm problem. Although mathematically more complex, elliptic curves provide smaller key sizes and faster operations for approximately equivalent estimated security."

So, I should sock my fortune into bitcoin for when the US economy collapses? That's the plan? Because THAT is the safe store of value?

Is that really what you're saying?

I betcha people in Turkey/Venezuela/etc. who need to put food on the table for their families could give a fuck about a BTC hash. They'd have done better to own US$. The bigger point is that everyman doesn't need to store value in currency, they just need to be able to spend it. And your 1 percenters shouldn't be storing value in currency either. They should store value in shit that has value. Shares of a company that produce something, for example. Or land. Or fucking gold.



Double digit fees? For international remittances? They're expensive because they're essentially a big fucking black box you throw money into. A global economy cleans this up, but I'm not sure what that has to do with bitbux. You prefer an anonymous dude in Australia to be your global economic overlord instead of a government with establishments and economic resources and (yes) military resources? Cool.



Just quoted for laffs.



We already addressed this idea that finite ultimate supply creates value somehow. Keep in mind that USD supply is also finite, even if it's expansionary.

If you actually have a fortune, I'd say investing a reasonable amount of money in crypto as a hedge is not a bad idea. But if you want to miss out on one of the best performing asset classes in history because you'd rather yell at kids to get off your lawn, that's your call.

We'll see what happens with USD, but it's not magically going to go up forever. Our current trajectory is not sustainable. You act like 2008 was 1000 years ago instead of 10.

I'm not sure what you're referring to as far as trusting an anonymous Australian dude for money transfers. The whole point of BTC is that it's decentralized and you don't have to trust anyone, Holmes. That's the whole point. Nobody has the power to shut it down or cease funds.

You're naive as fuck if you think crypto isn't here to stay. So laugh all you want. ICE, The owners of many exchanges including the NYSE are about to launch Bakkt in a few months, GS is still in the game too apparently. Like I've said before, I don't think these types of behemoths are in it for any reason greater than they see they have to be to stay relevant.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

[ICantLogIn]

Come on give me 600.00 dip...

[Mustonen]

So we aren’t saying it’s disruptive, or a panacea for the masses, or going to change the lives of poor people? It’s just a thing that some people use, out of a lack of other viable options or out of speculation/novelty? We’re saying it’s not actually going to remove barriers for the underbanked, outside of being another peripheral medium through which value can be exchanged? A poor substitute for a viable currency, but still a substitute?

Sure.

[4matic]

ETC or LTC probably has to go completely bust for a low to be in. There can only be one or two survivors if it is going to serve as currency.

[The Suit]

This is a short part of the history around private/public key cryptography. BTC is backed by math because there are many years of mathematical principles baked in. It's much harder to circumvent these than it is for a couple of back room cigar smoking pricks to rig the Libor rate or start up the next round of QE.

From Wikipedia:

..."In 1976, an asymmetric key cryptosystem was published by Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman who, influenced by Ralph Merkle's work on public key distribution, disclosed a method of public key agreement. This method of key exchange, which uses exponentiation in a finite field, came to be known as Diffie–Hellman key exchange. This was the first published practical method for establishing a shared secret-key over an authenticated (but not confidential) communications channel without using a prior shared secret. Merkle's "public key-agreement technique" became known as Merkle's Puzzles, and was invented in 1974 and published in 1978.

In 1977, a generalization of Cocks' scheme was independently invented by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman, all then at MIT. The latter authors published their work in 1978, and the algorithm came to be known as RSA, from their initials. RSA uses exponentiation modulo a product of two very large primes, to encrypt and decrypt, performing both public key encryption and public key digital signature. Its security is connected to the extreme difficulty of factoring large integers, a problem for which there is no known efficient general technique. In 1979, Michael O. Rabin published a related cryptosystemthat is probably secure as long as the factorization of the public key remains difficult – it remains an assumption that RSA also enjoys this security.

Since the 1970s, a large number and variety of encryption, digital signature, key agreement, and other techniques have been developed in the field of public key cryptography. The ElGamal cryptosystem, invented by Taher ElGamal relies on the similar and related high level of difficulty of the discrete logarithm problem, as does the closely related DSA, which was developed at the US National Security Agency (NSA) and published by NIST as a proposed standard.

The introduction of elliptic curve cryptography by Neal Koblitz and Victor Miller, independently and simultaneously in the mid-1980s, has yielded new public key algorithms based on the discrete logarithm problem. Although mathematically more complex, elliptic curves provide smaller key sizes and faster operations for approximately equivalent estimated security."

As I said before, I understand the math.

Apparently we have very different definitions of the term "backed by" as applied to a currency or an asset class. No further explanation needed.

[dunfree]

The beauty of my position is that it's not dependent on 'most people' 'online circle jerks' or random canadians high on scotch. For people that do not have access to stable fiat, crypto is an opening to normalcy. So long as fiat networks undergo periodic collapse, crypto will be in demand. So long as it's in demand, there is an objective use case. We can argue about relative degrees of utilization, and in the US it's absurdly low for obvious reasons, but to deny the objective reality of a durable economic need is to lie to yourself.

I'm not denying the objective reality of durable economic needs for the populace at all. I'm looking for verification - facts - that this demand is being channeled into bitcoins, whatever other coins you care about, for transactional use in places of hyperinflation, etc. etc.

edit to add: when your demand is "spiking" to $12 million US a week, the underlying use of the currency is still low.

[stalefish3169]

I don't see an efficient reporting mechanism in place in TUR or VZ given regime interest in jailing journalists & market participants. Are you getting a good overview of those markets or is it opaque for you too?

Following this dude on the Twitters

Check out EduardoGómez (@Codiox): https://twitter.com/Codiox?s=09

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

[The Suit]

You own any, Suit?

Nope. I have more than enough high-risk startup equity, so I aim for mediocrity with everything else. Minimal leverage, too.

[dunfree]

I don't see an efficient reporting mechanism in place in TUR or VZ given regime interest in jailing journalists & market participants. Are you getting a good overview of those markets or is it opaque for you too?

My "objective reality" is BTC and the like have been mechanisms certain people have chosen to move their assets from regimes with currency controls or the like to areas without currency controls. China, India, Turkey, Venezuela. I've seen very little to document these people having any interest in their funds remaining in BTC or whatever coin aka "adopting" it as a currency. You stated that this adoption is fact - I was just asking for a little information on this "fact".

The fact that adoption is spiking in countries with domestic fiat issues is a major tell from the market that something is driving utilization. Until you understand the why behind that utilization spike, you have no standing to narrate its future course.

[Mustonen]

You're saying those things, not anyone else. Disruption is notoriously difficult to predict, yet you approach it as though it's readily understood. Fewer assumptions, more humility in the face of rapid change within an incredibly complex system.

The fact that adoption is spiking in countries with domestic fiat issues is a major tell from the market that something is driving utilization. Until you understand the why behind that utilization spike, you have no standing to narrate its future course.

You mean I’m not not saying these things? I’m just saying that cryptocurrency hasn’t yet disrupted shit, and that it doesn’t currently promise to solve any problem based on any unique merits. Not that it won’t. And not that it can’t. When it’s posited that it’s poised to solve or resolve or relieve the economic problems of Venezuela or Turkey, well, that’s bullshit. You aren’t doing anybody or anything any favors. You’re just feeding your hype beast with confirmation bias. It strikes me as amusing. And a little gross. So I mock the blatantly stupid shit like “literally backed by math” and “shit is about to get very very real” and I question and dismiss the disingenuous shit that keeps being thrown against the wall - like that distributed ledgers are going to disrupt the mortgage origination industry by creating better audit trails.

I think ideas have value, and those ideas are hurt by hyperbole and frothing.

[stalefish3169]

You mean I’m not not saying these things? I’m just saying that cryptocurrency hasn’t yet disrupted shit, and that it doesn’t currently promise to solve any problem based on any unique merits. Not that it won’t. And not that it can’t. When it’s posited that it’s poised to solve or resolve or relieve the economic problems of Venezuela or Turkey, well, that’s bullshit. You aren’t doing anybody or anything any favors. You’re just feeding your hype beast with confirmation bias. It strikes me as amusing. And a little gross. So I mock the blatantly stupid shit like “literally backed by math” and “shit is about to get very very real” and I question and dismiss the disingenuous shit that keeps being thrown against the wall - like that distributed ledgers are going to disrupt the mortgage origination industry by creating better audit trails.

I think ideas have value, and those ideas are hurt by hyperbole and frothing.

You're dense af if you think that BTC/crypto isn't disruptive. It's 1996 and you're calling the internet worthless because it can't stream HD video yet.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

[Mustonen]

You're dense af if you think that BTC/crypto isn't disruptive. It's 1996 and you're calling the internet worthless because it can't stream HD video yet.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app

What has it disrupted?

[Mustonen]

Are you fucking serious?

[stalefish3169]

What has it disrupted?

This is a pretty good explanation among many.

https://www.norupp.com/bitcoin-and-p...ve-technology/

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using TGR Forums mobile app