A Libertarian Battle Over Bitcoin - Libertarian Investments

Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme libertarians use to make money off each other- The atlantic

Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme libertarians use to make money off each other- The atlantic submitted by zerosyztem to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another submitted by witchsbrew to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another submitted by Aqua_lung to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin is revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another - The Washington Post

Bitcoin is revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another - The Washington Post submitted by jimrosenz to Libertarian [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

submitted by h1ppophagist to NeoliberalConspiracy [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

submitted by ironclay3 to ethicalevidence [link] [comments]

A libertarian marketing ponzi scheme... but with Bitcoins!

Got this text out of http://butwithbitcoins.com and thought it was oddly relevant.
submitted by pseudopseudonym to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

submitted by subscribe-by-reddit to UnionSquareVentures [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Revealed: Libertarian Ponzi Scheme

Bitcoin Revealed: Libertarian Ponzi Scheme submitted by PM_ME_UR_COMPLAINTS to Stuff [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another submitted by TwylaSohen to altnewz [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another submitted by Truthbot to progressive [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another; "If Bitcoin were a currency, it'd be the worst-performing one in the world, worse even than the Russian ruble."

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another; submitted by PoliticBot to ModerationLog [link] [comments]

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another

Bitcoin revealed: a Ponzi scheme for redistributing wealth from one libertarian to another submitted by PoliticBot to ModerationLog [link] [comments]

CMV: This time, Bitcoin really is dead

All of you who have read about Bitcoin know how much that currency fluctuates. It went from pennies to a dollar, then to 30 dollars and crashed back to 2 dollars, then to 200 dollars and crash back again. Then went to 1,800 dollars and went back again, etc, etc. This has been used as an argument by those who still believe in the currency to criticize people who don't believe in it. That every time that Bitcoin was declared dead it came back to new all-time highs.

However, this time I do believe things are different. Here's my reasoning, tell me what I may be missing:

1 - Bitcoin is now 10-years-old - Let's face it, facebook, instagram, the iphone... After the year 2000 none of the world-changing revolutions in tech took more than 10 years to happen. If Bitcoin hasn't picked up steam by now, chances are it never will.

2 - This time the general population thinks it is a Ponzi scheme. - Regardless of the tech itself (which I do believe is the work of geniuses) the widespread "feeling" is that crypto currencies will make you lose money. Back in 2013, 50 people knew about bitcoin, so if 45 of them gave up on the damn thing due to a crash, there would be millions out there who never heard of it ready to replace them. Now everyone and their uncle have heard about bitcoin. And after this last $20,000 -> $3,500 crash they are not touching it with a 10-foot pole. Who's out there to replace them?

3 - There are better alternatives coming - Most people don't care about "fighting the power" and other libertarian ideals. They simply want to live their lives. When facebook introduces their own currency, and with apple pay taking off, there's just no need for virtual currencies that won't work as good as theirs, no matter how noble their long term objectives may be.

Isn't it time we accepted that Bitcoin will become the Linux of currencies? That is: though it's free and full of well-intentioned developers and noble and great... it will never surpass Windows. It will always become a niche thing, no matter what.
submitted by elverino to changemyview [link] [comments]

51% attacks are morally justifiable

In this short post I want to set out my case for the moral justifiability of 51% attacks against proof of work cryptocurrencies. In the past, a 51% attack was a theoretical construct that most people didn´t seem to think would be practically achievable or lucrative. This has now changed, as hashpower can be rented on sites like Nicehash and Mining Rig Rentals for a few hours at a time. The attack delivers the attacker two prominent opportunities:
-You can orphan blocks of ¨legitimate¨ miners. This essentially means that whatever work was produced by legitimate miners during your attack became worthless. Mine a secret chain of two hours worth of blocks, release it and you orphaned 2 hours worth of blocks by your competitors. By the time most of the miners have noticed their blocks were orphaned in an attack, their nodes will have been automatically mining on your own chain for a while and it will be too late for them to do anything about it. The amount of money they lost would be equivalent to the amount you had to spend to produce your chain. Because mining is an industry with tight margins, the economic impact on these miners can be very big. The cost may be sufficient in case of a very long attack, to persuade them to quit their endeavor and get a real job.
-The more important opportunity is that you´re able to double spend your coins. This is potentially, incredibly lucrative. How lucrative it is tends to depend primarily on the inflation rate of a cryptocurrency. A low inflation rate means relatively little ¨work¨ is done to maintain the security of the system. A high inflation rate on the other hand, turns the cryptocurrency into a very poor long-term investment. As a consequence, most cryptocurrencies face declining inflation rates, that delay the problem of their ultimately unsustainability into the future. The bank of international settlements explains this issue here.
When it comes to the moral justification of a 51% attack, we first have to ask ourselves why proof of work is morally unjustifiable. There are two main reasons for this:
-Proof of work has an enormous environmental impact, that ensures future generations will have to deal with the dramatic consequences of climate change. There is no proper justification for this environmental impact, as it delivers no clear benefits over existing payment systems other than the ability to carry out morally unjustifiable actions like blackmail.
-Proof of work is fundamentally unsustainable, because of the economic burden it places on participants in cryptocurrency schemes. Cryptocurrencies can´t produce wealth out of thin air. The people who get rich from a cryptocurrency becomes rich, due to the fact that other people step in later. In this sense we´re dealing with a pyramid scheme, but the difference from regular pyramid schemes lies in the fact that huge sums of wealth are not merely redistributed, but destroyed, to sustain the scheme. The cost of the work to sustain the scheme is bigger than you might expect, because the reality is that relatively little money has entered bitcoin. JP Morgan claims that for the crypto assets at large, a fiat amplifier of 117.5 is present, as a purported $2 billion in net inflow pushed Bitcoin’s market capitalization from $15 billion to $250 billion. You have to consider that the Digiconomist estimates that $2.6 billion dollar leaves the Bitcoin scheme on an annual basis, in the form of mining costs to sustain Bitcoin. The vast majority of retail customers who entered this scheme ended up losing money from it. In some cases this lead to suicides.
The fact that proof of work is morally unjustifiable doesn´t directly lead to a moral justification for a 51% attack. After all a sane society would use government intervention to eliminate the decentralized ponzi schemes that are cryptocurrencies. There are a few things that need to be considered however:
-Governments have so far failed in their responsibility to address the cryptocurrency schemes. Instead you tend to see officials insist that proof of work might suck and most cryptocurrency is a scam, but ¨blockchain technology¨ will somehow change the world for the better. Most libertarians who saw these schemes emerge insisted that it´s stupid to participate in them because the government would eventually ban them and round up the people who participated in them. This didn´t happen because of the logistical difficulty of suppressing these schemes (anyone with an internet connection can set one up) as well as the fact that suppressing them would lend credence to the anti-government anarcho-capitalist ideology on which these schemes are based. Goverments might say ¨these schemes facilitate crime, ruin the environment and redistribute wealth from naive individuals to scammers¨, but anarcho-capitalists would insist that governments have grown so tyrannical that they want to ban you from exchanging numbers on computers.
-Because cryptocurrency is fundamentally an online social arrangement, governments have very limited influence over the phenomenon. Binance seeks to become a stateless organization, not subject to the jurisdiction of any particular government. Just as with regular money laundering and tax evasion that hides in small nations that can earn huge sums of money by facilitating these practises, governments are dependent on the actions of individuals to address these practices. Whistleblowers released the panama papers and the tax evasion by German individuals through Swiss bank accounts. Through such individuals, the phenomenon could be properly addressed. In a similar manner, cryptocurrency schemes will need to be addressed through the actions of individuals who recognize the damage these schemes cause to the fabric of society.
-The very nature of a 51% attack means that it primarily punishes those who set up and facilitate the cryptocurrency scheme in the first place. The miners who pollute our environment to satiate their own greed are bankrupted by the fact that their blocks are orphaned. The exchange operators are bankrupted due to double-spend attacks against the scams that they facilitate. When this happens, the cryptocurrency in question should lose value, which then destroys the incentive to devote huge sums of electricity to it.
Finally, there´s the question of whether 51% attacks are viable as a response to cryptocurrency. There´s the obvious problem you run into, that the biggest and oldest scams are the most difficult to shut down. In addition, cryptocurrencies that fell victim to an attack tend to move towards a checkpoint system. However, there are a few things that need to be considered here:
-51% attacks against small cryptocurrencies might not have a huge impact, but their benefit is nonetheless apparent. Most of the new scams don´t require participants to mine, instead the new schemes generally depend on ¨staking¨. If people had not engage in 51% attacks, the environmental impact would have been even bigger now.
-51% attacks against currencies that implement checkpointing are not impossible, if the checkpoints are decentrally produced. What happens in that case is a chain split, as long as the hostile chain is released at the right time. This would mean that different exchanges may get stuck on different forks, which would still allow people to double spend their cryptocurrency.
-There are other attacks that can be used against proof of work cryptocurrencies. The most important one is the block withholding attack. It´s possible for people who dislike a cryptocurrency to join a pool and to start mining. However, whenever the miner finds a valid solution that would produce a block, he fails to share the solution with the pool. This costs money for the pool operator, but it can be lucrative for the actor if he also operates a competing pool himself. In the best case it leads to miners moving to his pool, which then potentially allows him to execute a 51% attack against the cryptocurrency.
-It´s possible to put up a 51% attack bounty, allowing others to do the work for you. This works as following. You make transaction A : 100 bitcoin to exchange X, for a fee of 0.001 BTC. Once this transaction has been included in a block, you immediately broadcast a conflicting transaction with another node: You´ŕe sending those 100 bitcoin to your own wallet, but you´re also including a 50 bitcoin fee for the miners. The miners now have a strong incentive to disregard the valid chain and to start mining a new chain on an older block that can still include your conflicting transaction. Provided that pool operators are rational economic agents, they should grab the opportunity.
-Selfish mining in combination with a Sybil attack allows someone to eclipse the rest of the network, while controlling less than 51% of the hashrate. Your malicious nodes will simply refuse to propagante blocks of your competitors, thereby giving you more time to release your own block. Selfish mining will always be possible with 33% of the hashrate and as far as I can tell there are no pathways known currently to make the scheme impossible for people with 25% of the hashrate. This potentially makes a 51% attacks lucrative without having to carry out double-spend attacks against exchanges. Although double spending is a form of theft, it´s not clear to me whether a selfish mining attack would get you into legal trouble or not.

Conclusion:

The dreaded 51% attack is a morally justifiable and potentially lucrative solution to the Nakamoto scheme.
submitted by milkversussoy to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

"The vast majority of mining hash power was controlled by people who were psychologically incapable of disobedience to perceived authority." -Mike Hearn

Mike was right, but in reality it isn't just miners. The vast majority of ALL PEOPLE are psychologically incapable of disobedience to perceived authority. Libertarians / anarchists are people much more willing to question authority and even disobey. That is why we were the first major group to start adopting Bitcoin even when the masses said it was a stupid Ponzi scheme. This is also why today the libertarians / anarchists are the ones supporting BCH. We can look at the "Core Developers" and question their authority. Their ideas were detrimental to Bitcoin adoption in theory, and now that they have had them implemented we have plenty of empirical evidence that full blocks have been incredibly damaging to BTC, yet the masses are still psychologically incapable of disobedience to Core's perceived authority. This is why I'm proud to be an AnCap, and why I'm proud to support Bitcoin BCH.
submitted by MemoryDealers to btc [link] [comments]

Are we complaining because IRS is treating crypto just like any other legit investment?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-02/government-coming-your-bitcoin I would have thought of this as an official seal of approval that we as crypto community have enough of value that IRS is taking interest in us and are treating us like regular investors. Gone are those days when people said that crypto is just a fruad/scam/ponzi scheme which will go away by next year. In my opinion, this is just IRS legitimizing cryptocurriens more than anything. I also understand the people who have libertarian views about taxes but those views are not about just crypto and are related to all taxes such as on ETF gains or income taxes so this is not related to that.
TL;dr We should be celebrating that IRS is taxing us just like they are taxing Wallstreet investors.
submitted by smallpenis3 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Reddit CEO Yishan Wang: " the userbase for bitcoin is basically crazy libertarians who are increasingly poorly-informed about currency systems and macroeconomics"

Reddit CEO Yishan Wang: submitted by 75000_Tokkul to Libertarian [link] [comments]

11-27 17:23 - '[quote]— "Why we don't support Cryptocurrencies". Alderson, Elliot. / I think the gist is, rather, "how obnoxious that this ham-fisted techno-utopian Ponzi scheme has managed to fill its bags by promulgating security through...' by /u/peakchain removed from /r/Bitcoin within 33-43min

'''
If everything goes the way that cryptocurrency utopians want it to, we'd still have wage labor, we'd still have private ownership and workplace dictatorships. The only thing that really changes for the poor is that they pay slightly lower transaction fees (assuming that we can still abundantly produce low-cost electricity, a shaky assumption when we are nearing the end of the fossil fuel age, for better or worse). Much like the libertarians' greatest opposition to the state is taxes and regulations, something that hardly affects poor people at all, their greatest opposition to the modern money system is likewise. It's not its obfuscation of rule and enslavement, its connection to the burning of fossil fuels, or its concentration in increasingly few hands that they take issue with, but that it grows too rapidly in quantity and costs too much to spend. — "Why we don't support Cryptocurrencies". Alderson, Elliot.
I think the gist is, rather, "how obnoxious that this ham-fisted techno-utopian Ponzi scheme has managed to fill its bags by promulgating security through obscurity (i.e., pseudonymity) and advertising confessing all sin on the ledger, just like the usurers who developed the One World Order."
Bitcoin takes all the worst parts of capitalism, Catholicism, and government and develops a smoke-screen that preys on the imaginations and hopes of victims of the state and the market.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: peakchain
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

11-10 01:33 - '[quote] There's no difference between the two - most Ancaps become fascists when they realize their ideology is a complete waste of time with no practical use or existing examples. / [quote] I don't know who the fuck t...' by /u/Colonel_Endemonia removed from /r/Bitcoin within 6-16min

'''
Oh now I'm a fascist too? Looool. I'm actually also an anarcho-capitalist.
There's no difference between the two - most Ancaps become fascists when they realize their ideology is a complete waste of time with no practical use or existing examples.
So you support Ross's double-lifetime sentence for being an anti-state libertarian?
I don't know who the fuck this is, but if you like him, I'm deeply saddened they didn't receive the death penalty.
You mean the resources it has violently stolen from unwilling people.
I don't care.
Do you support violently stealing from your neighbours?
If it was necessary to survive - sure.
You mean the humanity that benefits from the stolen blood-soaked loot.
I don't care, and I'm okay with that. Its just how the world works.
Ancaps, most of the og bitcoiners
Ancaps, people that use government electrification to run their fictitious capital? Try running your shitty Ponzi scheme without government assistance, and then I'll be impressed.
Just like a thief benefits from his theft. The person being stolen does not benefit.
Cry about it
Like, people should become more civil and not use brutal violence to steal from others and to not violently force their way on others, right?
No, it should use even more violence to deal with desperately important issues such as climate change and poverty. China, for example, has the right idea on how to use state resources to accomplish these goals. It is the more efficient form of capitalism, and such a state will be very useful in the future for dealing with inevitable widespread discontent we're on course for very soon.
story of Hitler right
Hitler was interested in liquidating people for their race. Communists are interested in liquidating classes, people that hoard wealth that they'll never be able to spend in a life time, but wealth that could be used to greatly benefit humanity. One famous communist who supported such position was a man called Adam Smith. You probably don't know him though.
What is "value-form"?
Exchange-value - the value you pay for selling commodities on a market.
How do you "do away" with wages? What if me and my employer agree to some contract where we trade my
labor for bitcoins -- are you going to imprison or kill us?
We're going to centralize all production by the state, and introduce rationing, quotas for goods according to a central plan. Distribution without private markets.
So I can take your laptop? Or move in to your house?
You can try.
You have no problem with violently forcing everyone to pay for shitty government-monopoly services, like mail delivery, schools, hospitals and welfare? And I thought you were against money (wage labor), why not just force teachers and doctors to work for free at gunpoint? That's much more direct and efficient.
I don't think you know what transition means. But again, you're an ancap, you don't even know what capitalism is, and I doubt you even own capital. You're a leech defending an ideology you don't benefit from because you're a wage slave at the bottom of the ladder like the most of us.
Kill capitalists?
Killing people is just how the world works. Before there were capitalists - there feudal lords that had to be hanged to bring about this system. The difference is that we don't have to hang people anymore - bullets and killer drones suffice.
Why do you use the euphemism "being taxed" instead of the more accurate "violently forced at gunpoint to pay for things I don't want or need"?
If you don't need these things - feel free to leave this society. Again, you don't have to be here
You're aware the current governments collude in a planet-wide cartel, where every inch of land is illegitimately claimed by them, right? Liberlanders are learning this the hard way -- even with so-called abandoned land that no country officially claims, they were not allowed to create their own community.
That seems like a problem for you, not me.The great thing about this is that I'm not an ancap, or a libertarian, and I'm intelligent enough realize that waiting for people do things voluntarily is a waste a time, and that force is much more appropriate for such an endeavor.
'''
Context Link
Go1dfish undelete link
unreddit undelete link
Author: Colonel_Endemonia
submitted by removalbot to removalbot [link] [comments]

So, I Just Found Out I Was Arguing With FAITH SLOAN, a Scam Artist....

Recently, I was on a Bitcoin.com article, describing the structure of Bitconnect.
After I read through the article, I figured that Bitconnect looks like a pyramid scheme. Pictures like these don't help
BITCONNECT ISN'T THE SUBJECT OF THIS POST
FAITH SLOAN IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS POST
After mentioning my concerns about Bitconnect, Faith Sloan wanted evidence to reassure that Bitconnect wasn't a Ponzi scheme. She would claim that her purpose is to understand and hear opinions but in reality, she would be trying to defend Bitconnect.
Here is link to the screen-capped posts of the conversation that I was having with Faith Sloan.
You are in for weird shit.
At one point, she demanded that I give her information that MLM scams fail. Once I did, she proceeded to let me know that she ignored those statements and continue to insult me.
Of course, this isn't the reason why I would post this here on Reddit.
I did some research on her and found out she has quite a past:
This TelexFREE shit was literally LAST FUCKING YEAR (2016).
Looking back through my screen-capped comments with Faith, I understand why she was defensive and deflating my questions: she is a sociopath and has a track record for doing that.
Faith has a history of deflating topics in order to avoid questions. She knows the buttons to press when engaging with the crypto-community (anti-government, libertarian buttons)
This is evident when looking through my comments with her that you can see here
Apparently now, she is trying to get into the cryptocurrency/blockchain space to sucker people into some more schemes.
Our goal with this is to make sure that Faith Sloan being a scam artist is public knowledge throughout the blockchain/cryptocurrency space.
Cryptocurrency and blockchain has a bad rep at it is but if we can at least drive one scammer away from cryptocurrency and blockchain publicly then it would be considered most definitely a good deed.
The best thing you can do right here is share this Reddit post on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Telegram. This needs to be public knowledge that there's a con artist in the crypto space who needs to be rightfully exposed and dealt away with.
TL;DR:
PROOF of HER CHECKERED PAST:
SHARE with FRIENDS on Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, BitcoinTalk, Telegram, Reddit that there is a con artist in cryptocurrency/blockchain space.
submitted by podaudio to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Slack chat with James Lovejoy (VTC Lead Dev)

Thought I would share this chat I had with James Lovejoy last night. Super generous of him to provide this much access and time answering questions. I was already a HODL'er, but this solidified it.
beerfinger [1:28 AM] Just read through the entire rebranding thread in the Vertcoin subreddit. Earlier today I also watched some of Crypto Hedge's interview of James Lovejoy from last August on YouTube. I understand both sides of the rebranding argument and have tried to play devil's advocate. Right now I do believe that the argument against rebranding is stronger. Full disclosure: I've worked in marketing/advertising my whole career and just recently got into cryptos. With that said, there are two questions that keeps nagging on me:
[1:28] 1. this coin has been around since 2014, so nearly 4 years. James seems like an incredibly smart and capable chap, but I'm just going to go ahead and assume the he hasn't always been the Lead Dev while he was in high school. Presumably there was someone before him and, after he graduates and moves on to whatever it is he's going to do with his life, there will be someone after him. Yes? So, with all due respect to James, as an investor in VTC, what assurances are there that this isn't merely an interesting side-project for a brilliant MIT student with little interest/incentive in its value as an investment portfolio? If the value of this coin to James is that of a college project, that is something I as an investor would like to know.
jamesl22 [1:32 AM] Hey!
[1:33] I've been the lead dev since Nov 2014
[1:33] (while I was in high school)
[1:33] And I've kept at it through college, I certainly don't intend to go anywhere
[1:33] Plus, there are more who work on this project that just me
beerfinger [1:33 AM] 2. I've read complaints about Vertcoin from people who poopoo its usefulness. Decrying it as "just another coin trying to be Bitcoin with not much differentiating it." People don't seem to view the ASIC thing as a big enough differentiator to make VTC stand out. There seems to be a kernel of truth to that as part of the argument against rebranding seems to be a tacit acknowledgement that it should not occur until a major change in the development is launched. So my question again stems back to James' motivations and incentives here. Is this a convenient use case for some college thesis? Or is the team really working on coming up with a major change in development?
[1:34] hey James! wow, thanks so much for your quick response
[1:34] great to actually communicate with you. and I stand corrected. very impressive that you started on this so young. I can see why MIT accepted you :slightly_smiling_face:
[1:36] my questions still stand though: I'm not trying to insult you so I hope you don't take it that way, but as someone who considers VTC part of my investment portfolio, I am very curious to hear about your incentives. You clearly have noble intentions. But what is your ultimate goal? What's the end game? Is it the same as Satoshi's was? (assuming he was really one person who existed)
[1:37] Or is there something else?
jamesl22 [1:37 AM] I think it's the same as Satoshi's
[1:37] To recreate the financial system in a fairer, more distributed way
[1:37] My research at MIT is totally separate to my work on VTC, though the two are complimentary (both are in cryptocurrency)
[1:38] In my ideal world everyone runs a VTC miner and full node in their home, banks become narrow banks and clearing houses/stock exchanges are a thing of the past
[1:39] The rewards of the financial system (in the form of transaction fees) will be distributed to the people, rather than siphoned off by banks or ASIC manufacturers as happens now (edited)
goodminer [1:40 AM] :thumbsup:
beerfinger [1:40 AM] I see. That is compelling. So, being that's the case, that sounds to me like something worthy of a brand, no?
[1:41] Unless you think there are other coins on the market with the same goals. In which case, what will differentiate VTC?
jamesl22 [1:42 AM] I don't think there are any on the market with as strong of an ideology as us
[1:42] Or any that can demonstrate that it follows through on its commitments
[1:42] The way I see it, VTC went from being worth $0.01 last year to 100x that now
[1:43] I don't see how a rebrand can possible accelerate already parabolic growth
[1:43] Bear in mind, that until a few months ago we had 0 marketing, that is where our focus should be now
beerfinger [1:44 AM] Fair. I'm curious, what do you think it SHOULD be worth?
[1:44] I mean right now, at this moment.
jamesl22 [1:44 AM] I don't think I should say, the SEC might be watching us
beerfinger [1:44 AM] Not in the future.
[1:44] haha
[1:44] ok
[1:44] Can you say if you feel it is undervalued?
[1:44] or overvalued
jamesl22 [1:45 AM] I will say with confidence that 95% of the top 100 is severely overvalued
beerfinger [1:45 AM] coins you mean
jamesl22 [1:45 AM] Yes
[1:45] On coinmarketcap
[1:45] If you visit most of their websites, there is no code at all
[1:45] Yet it's worth many times what VTC is worth
[1:46] Where VTC has been established for nearly 4 years, bug free and features well demonstrated
[1:46] VTC also had LN and SegWit on main net before LTC or BTC (edited)
beerfinger [1:46 AM] Yes I mean your statement doesn't surprise me. It's a nacent market. Lots of snake oil, clearly.
[1:47] I guess to steer this back towards the branding/marketing of your coin though, you clearly feel strongly about it and have a clear vision. Do you feel that as it stands the branding conveys that sentiment?
jamesl22 [1:47 AM] When you say branding, I assume you mean "vertcoin" and the logo?
beerfinger [1:48 AM] yes. logo, color scheme, etc...
[1:48] name even
[1:49] also to clarify one point, when I say that you clearly feel strongly about it, the "it" refers to your coin (not the marketing of it)
jamesl22 [1:49 AM] I think it's largely arbitrary
beerfinger [1:49 AM] why is that
jamesl22 [1:49 AM] Most coin names have no meaning whatsoever
[1:49] Google, the largest tech company in the world has a silly name
[1:50] Litecoin (whose name ought to imply it has fewer features) is #4
beerfinger [1:51 AM] I wouldn't underestimate the amount of strategy that went into branding Google (and continues to this day)
jamesl22 [1:51 AM] What's most important is the pitch, how can you convince someone who knows nothing about the technicals behind cryptocurrency, that ASIC resistance and decentralisation is important?
[1:51] Yes, but the original branding was arbitrary and haphazard
[1:52] Yet the technology spoke for itself
[1:52] Now it's in the dictionary
[1:53] Spending lots of time and money on a new name/logo, trying to get community consensus on that and then redesigning the website/subreddit/wallets/other services to reflect the changes is not where I think we should focus our small resources
[1:54] My goal over the next year or two is to take VTC from speculative value to real-world value
[1:54] So point of sale, ease of use, that's the focus now
[1:55] I aim to over time provide complete solutions for merchants to implement VTC at point of sale, for laymen to set up nodes and miners in their homes
[1:55] As well as potentially enterprise support if we get big enough
beerfinger [1:55 AM] It sounds like this is your intended career path then, yes?
jamesl22 [1:55 AM] In some shape or form, yes
beerfinger [1:55 AM] Wonderful
[1:55] When do you graduate, James?
[1:55] If you don't mind me asking
slackbot Custom Response [1:55 AM] I AM talking to you aren't I !
jamesl22 [1:56 AM] Charlie Lee worked at Coinbase for several years before returning to LTC a month or two ago
[1:56] 2019
beerfinger [1:56 AM] So you're a Sophomore? Or are you in graduate school?
jamesl22 [1:57 AM] Junior
chuymgzz [1:58 AM] @beerfinger can you imagine when people first heard the word "dollar" like WTF is a dollar where did it actually came from. It actually comes from Czech joachimsthaler, which became shortened in common usage to thaler or taler. Don't pay much attention to the name Vertcoin, just take a look at the tech. If you buy into this coin's ideology, you will actually start to like the name.
jin [1:58 AM] Hey guys :slightly_smiling_face:
[1:59] @chuymgzz but not everyone looks purely at the tech, if we look at the top 100 coins, you would know whats going on :stuck_out_tongue:
beerfinger [1:59 AM] Cool well thanks for indulging me, James. I really appreciate it. Hopefully this conversation continues in the future. While your probably right that right now is probably not the right time, that doesn't mean at some point in the future it won't be. In the meantime, I'll take comfort in the knowledge that I've invested in a worthy cause.
chuymgzz [1:59 AM] Longer term only the functional ones and the ones that deliver will survive and a whole ecosystem will be built around it
jin [1:59 AM] buzz and hype is unfortunately a large part of it
beerfinger [2:00 AM] *you're
jin [2:00 AM] that is true, but without marketing to draw in attention (which leads to usage and so on etc) it will be difficult for a functional one to survive even
beerfinger [2:07 AM] @james122 One more thing: how do you feel about regulation? Pro or con? Do you feel that the idea of nation states like the US and China (ergo the ICO ban) taking it upon themselves to place restrictions on the market to try and make them safer is anathema to the idea of decentralization? Are you a full on libertarian in that respect? Or do you welcome regulation because it'll separate the wheat from the chaff?
jamesl22 [2:07 AM] I think we need a sane amount of regulation
[2:08] ICOs are clearly illegal imo
[2:08] Unless they are performed under the same rules as an IPO
[2:09] Plus I don't want to create a safe harbour for child pornographers, people traffickers and terrorists to store their money
[2:09] However I do think the state has no right to spy on you without a warrant (edited)
beerfinger [2:09 AM] You mean you don't want to be Monero? :slightly_smiling_face:
jamesl22 [2:09 AM] No
[2:10] I will pursue privacy features that make the pseudoanonymity provided by the blockchain easier for people to use effectively
[2:11] That way, it is not obvious to anyone your holdings or transactions publicly (edited)
[2:11] But things like sting operations would still be theoretically possible
beerfinger [2:13 AM] Love it. I still feel the branding thing will need to be revisited at some point. I don't know what that means, exactly. Whether its as small as a font change to something bigger like a new color scheme, logo or even name, I'm not sure of. The ideology is strong, but as it stands Vertcoin doesn't have a clear differentiator in the market. I'm not sure that matters so much yet at this time, but it will.
[2:15] You clearly have a strong vision, I'm just not sure it's being communicated effectively yet. Hence, haters who say Vertcoin is just trying to be another Bitcoin.
workstation [2:15 AM] beerfinger might be a huge whale sniffing out Vertcoin before a huge loadup. Not that, that's a bad thing :stuck_out_tongue:
beerfinger [2:15 AM] haha... I wish
jamesl22 [2:16 AM] Vertcoin is trying to be another Bitcoin lol
[2:16] It's picking up where Bitcoin left off
[2:16] If people want a decentralised cryptocurrency, they should use Vertcoin
[2:17] Bitcoin just isn't one anymore
[2:17] Neither is Litecoin (edited)
beerfinger [2:20 AM] Semantics really, but if that's the case then that means Vertcoin isn't trying to be another Bitcoin. Bitcoin is already Bitcoin, which is a coin that did not fulfill it's promises. Vertcoin, on the other hand, like you said picks up where Bitcoin left off. I'm not sure that's being communicated by the brand (yet). Doing so may have nothing to do with rebranding (unless rebranding generates a bigger social following who then helps you communicate that).
workstation [2:20 AM] You've continued on a great coin James and no doubt Vertcoin has great features vs other coins, however without widespread use and adoption, Vertcoin might just become another coin without much use. The marketing side is sometimes even more important than the development side. Just need to look at history for that. E.g. Early version of Windows was buggy, bluescreen of death plagued it. But with heaps of $$ and marketing, Windows is pretty rock solid these days.
atetnowski [2:21 AM] joined #marketing.
jamesl22 [2:22 AM] Yes, agreed to both statements
[2:22] We're working on it, but it takes time and money
[2:23] But really, adoption is pointless until point of sale works properly
[2:23] When you can get it into people's physical wallets, or phone and they can spend it in a store, that's when it takes off (edited)
[2:23] Walmart, Target, all the big retailers hate Visa and Mastercard
workstation [2:24 AM] Thats a long way off... Even Apple and Samsung are struggling in that area
jamesl22 [2:24 AM] They would love a solution that opted them out of having to pay their fees
beerfinger [2:25 AM] @workstation To play devil's advocate for one sec, most successful people in the world don't achieve success because they tried to achieve success. Success is merely a byproduct of their passion. I do believe that James' commitment to the ideology can be sufficient. But it is true that the branding should communicate his vision. That is a constant conversation, too.
workstation [2:25 AM] yes, true
jamesl22 [2:26 AM] What we really need is talented content creators to make compelling media that explains the vision in a layman friendly way
[2:26] Thus far the message has been far too technical
[2:26] But in the past, the space was mostly populated by technical people so that is understandable
[2:26] It is only in the last 6 months that the general public has started to get involved
[2:27] Sadly "ASIC resistance" doesn't speak to them
beerfinger [2:27 AM] @james122 While it's true that universal adoption is key, you can say that about ANY coin. Even dogecoin would suddenly become a real coin if everyone up and decided to start using it one day. What's your strategy for making VTC that coin?
jamesl22 [2:27 AM] Whereas I think taking power from banks, chinese miners and giving it back to the people can be far more compelling
workstation [2:27 AM] We take Visa and Mastercard at our stores. We only do it because it boosts sales. People these days are all borrowing on credit because they don't have enough.... Paying on their CC# lets them buy things now (instant gratification) and slowly pay later. They managed to get banks on board because they make so much money on the interest. There is a clear reason why those cards satisfy a demand. We get charged about 1.5% by VISA/MC. To be honest, it's not a real deal breaker.
beerfinger [2:27 AM] haha, well, james you're talking to the right guy :slightly_smiling_face:
[2:28] My career is content creation
[2:28] I have nearly 20 years producing commercials and (lately) social content for global brands
mikevert [2:29 AM] joined #marketing.
beerfinger [2:29 AM] I would be happy to consult and provide any assistance I can
[2:29] "taking power from banks, chinese miners and giving it back to the people can be far more compelling" - that's your modus operandi
[2:29] you can definitely tell that story in a compelling way
[2:30] Question: have any crypto's ever created any sort of ad before? Even just for social content? (sorry, I'm new to this space)
jamesl22 [2:30 AM] Well we'd obviously be grateful for your assistance
[2:31] I'd imagine so, though I don't follow many other coins' social media very much
goodminer [2:31 AM] @beerfinger lets chat :smile: We've been working on a lot of initiatives over the last few weeks
jamesl22 [2:31 AM] @workstation 1.5% to a huge retailer is a large sum of money though
workstation [2:35 AM] I don't see any coin being widely used to be honest. They fluctuate way too much. Say a typical consumer whose after tax salary is $1000/week.. He buys groceries at the store for $1/Liter. This is simple maths for him, he knows it's going to cost $1 each week, inflation may make it rise to $1.10 next year, but he understands that. With coins, the price of his milk is too hard to calculate.
[2:37] Why would Bob switch to using coins, when Visa/MC give him so much more? He doesnt pay the processing fee (1.5%), he gets free credit (these days, banks will easily approve 10k credits). Why would he switch to Vertcoin?
jamesl22 [2:37 AM] @workstation, volatility is high because market volume is low
[2:38] I think it will take another financial crisis or two though before people start to abandon fractional reserve banking (edited)
workstation [2:42 AM] As long as bob gets his paycheck, he's not going to care what happens at the fed
jamesl22 [2:43 AM] Bob ain't gunna get his paycheck one day though
[2:44] Because the credit ponzi scheme economy will have collapsed
workstation [2:48 AM] yes, the fed can print whatever it wants out of thin air... But its backed by US tax payers to the tune of 2+ trillion/year with most banks adhering to loan capital requirements. E.g. they need a certain amount of money deposited before they can loan more money out. What is Bitcoin/alt coins backed by? Seems like its somewhat of a ponzi scheme now, with everyone piling in thinking it will go up forever. I get that BTC is backed by real energy usage/capital requirements to mine it (asic equipment, datacenters, etc), so its more "real" than $1 USD, but they both service a purpose.
axelfoley75 [2:49 AM] joined #marketing.
workstation [2:51 AM] but whats the end goal because it seems they all become ponzi schemes. The only true coin will be one that will not allow any fiats be converted to to coin.
[2:51] the only way to earn a coin, would be to mine it, wouldn't you think that that would be the truest coin?
[2:52] right now people are just moving wads of fiat money into coins/alt coins, thereby skewing everything.
beerfinger [2:54 AM] just jumping in here with one last comment before I go to sleep: money, whether we're talking salt, precious metals, fiat currency, or cryptos, is just something that we all agree to prescribe a value to. That being the case, how are you going to stop someone from trading that value for something they want? If someone wants to trade their cryptos for chickens, a latte, USD or anything else, they're going to do it. No point in trying to regulate what people spend their money on or how they do it. Seems the antithesis of the whole decentralization thing anyway
workstation [2:57 AM] true
aegisker [3:02 AM] I belive when crypto matures, has fast and easy payments solutions, volume will rise and price will be more stable. Current price is speculation due to news and new development. I dont belive that after 10 years we will be seeing such swings.
beerfinger [3:04 AM] sorry keep thinking of new stuff... @jamesl22 your point about POS is salient. What's your perspective on coins like TenX that try to address that with payment platforms and cards?
[3:05] is that what you mean? nuts & bolts, how would Vertcoin become a POS option?
aegisker [3:06 AM] How is usdt keeping its price around usd?
beerfinger [3:07 AM] don't they just keep up with USD inflation by making sure there's an equal amount of tokens to USD in the market at any given point?
jamesl22 [3:07 AM] Integration of LN and AS is key
[3:07] Then providing some hardware or software solution to integrate with payment processors
[3:07] I haven't looked at tenx
beerfinger [3:07 AM] so Vertcoin IS actively pursuing this then
[3:08] interesting
[3:09] perhaps there's some way to leverage things like ApplePay
jamesl22 [3:09 AM] I doubt it
[3:09] ApplePay's design is fundamentally different
beerfinger [3:09 AM] I mean it doesn't have to be ApplePay itself. Can be a separate app
lucky [3:09 AM] Having bitcoin or altcoins tied to your debit card isn't unbelievable
jamesl22 [3:10 AM] Of course not
[3:10] But it is suboptimal
beerfinger [3:10 AM] yeah sort of kills the whole decentralization thing
lucky [3:10 AM] in fact if we are going the whole hog and saying fiat collapsed. You'd be silly to think the banks would standby and let crypto take over without them
beerfinger [3:10 AM] now we're relying on banks again
lucky [3:11 AM] At the first sign of crypto succeeding fiat. Banks will take over
[3:11] Because they can trade their fiat to coin
[3:11] Government too
aegisker [3:12 AM] Well, banks issues debt, whole market is built around debt. Crypto would take that away
[3:12] This will be hardest transition
jamesl22 [3:12 AM] If the crypto market ever gets to say $1tril, the banks will use their lobbyist army to squash it as best they can
lucky [3:13 AM] Is it not possible crypto gets immediately regulated into the banking system as soon as it passed fiat in some way
jamesl22 [3:13 AM] They don't care right now because the space is tiny compared to their own equity
lucky [3:13 AM] Yes exactly James
beerfinger [3:13 AM] i like the idea of leveraging NFC tech as a way to introduce crypto to POS purchases... everyone already has a smart phone so no need to reinvent the wheel... it's basically just an app
lucky [3:13 AM] If finance is going to change politics needs to too
[3:14] Nfc seems like the way. Yeag
[3:14] Lots of the android wallets leverage it
aegisker [3:14 AM] No need for nfc, nfc was kinda overhyped. Qr codes can work equally good
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] @beerfinger I think LN will allow us to achieve that
lucky [3:14 AM] Lol qr
[3:14] Who has ever scanned a qr....
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] We just need a hardware implementation for the reader
beerfinger [3:14 AM] sorry james, what's LN?
lucky [3:14 AM] Apple made sure qr never worked
jamesl22 [3:14 AM] Lightning Network
beerfinger [3:14 AM] ah
aegisker [3:15 AM] If u use your phone, why complicate with nfc, is there a security benefit?
beerfinger [3:15 AM] the infrastructure is there... most readers i come across these days are already NFC compliant
jamesl22 [3:15 AM] QR can work, but requires a high res display in the POS device
[3:15] Which would increase costs
[3:15] NFC is cheap af
lucky [3:16 AM] Yep. Qr is extremely requirement heavy
aegisker [3:16 AM] For example, pub: you get check with qr. U pay with your phone. Waiter sees on his computer that its payed.
lucky [3:16 AM] Look at Asia and south America
[3:16] Nobody can read qr
aegisker [3:17 AM] I europe all checks already have qrs for tax checking
lucky [3:17 AM] I work in global marketing. Qr is completely unadopted in the real world
[3:17] Yes in no public scenario qr is used
aegisker [3:17 AM] Where you from?
lucky [3:17 AM] Uk
[3:19] A decade in marketing I can tell you for sure Joe public doesn't scan qr codes
[3:19] James is right. We need an alternative hardware solution
[3:19] And I think I unique piece of tech in public would drive massive interest
aegisker [3:20 AM] In slovenia, croatia, austria(i tjink) there is law that all transactions in coffeeshops or shops(everything with fiat transaction) is sent to tax authority as soon as check is printed. U get qr code on your check, so you can check if tax s paid for your service. This is to prevent black markets and unauthorized sellers. Works pretty well. If you frequently scan qrs you can get some bonuses..
[3:21] Public got used to this pretty fast.
lucky [3:21 AM] So there's an incentive
aegisker [3:21 AM] So also you could print qr shop wallet addr.
lucky [3:21 AM] Kind of skews the ease of adoption stat we are looking for
aegisker [3:22 AM] Costz nothing
lucky [3:22 AM] Costs a smartphone with a quick camera
[3:22] How about in a dark club
beerfinger [3:23 AM] I came tonight with many questions about Vertcoin. Namely the incentives of the Devs and how it differentiated itself in the marketplace. All of those questions have been answered as best as I could have hoped. The only thing left is figuring out a way to tell that story. @jamesl22, all of the things you've said tonight are reassuring and exciting. They provide great promise for the future of this coin and even more - your goals, if realized, are truly category shifting. This is such a compelling story. TELL IT!
lucky [3:23 AM] Asking every transaction to require an in focus photo capability is insane, imo
aegisker [3:23 AM] uploaded and commented on this image: IMG_20170908_092307.jpg 1 Comment Thats how it looks
lucky [3:23 AM] We need something similar to a contactless debit card
[3:24] Good luck scanning that in the dark with a £100 smartphone. Though.
aegisker [3:24 AM] For starters this is easiest solution for early adoption (edited)
workstation [3:25 AM] why not something short like vCoin. Then u could make it go off V=Vendetta, sort of has a nice mystery, anti establishment
aegisker [3:25 AM] You just need plugin for your pos software that checks your crypto wallet for received funds
[3:26] Imo this is easiest way to implement first public purchases of beer or coffee
beerfinger [3:26 AM] by the way, less is more when it comes to branding
[3:26] look at apple
[3:26] i love this example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUXnJraKM3k YouTube Brant Walsh Microsoft Re-Designs the iPod Packaging
[3:31] and there's always something to be said for ad wars... apple's david vs goliath attack ads vs microsoft is what put them back on the map
[3:31] that could be a great angle for Vertcoin... go after Bitcoin
[3:31] make fun of it the way Jobs poked at Gates
[3:32] that's just my 2 Vertcoins
submitted by beerfinger to vertcoin [link] [comments]

Rickards: ‘Bitcoin is a Ponzi Scheme’ - YouTube Is Bitcoin a pyramid scheme or Ponzi Is Bitcoin A Ponzi Scheme? - YouTube Fact: Bitcoin Is A Ponzi Scheme Bitcoin : a moronic ponzi scheme

I haven’t read or heard any libertarian who says that Bitcoin should be illegal or that it is somehow fraudulent. While I tend to side more with Gary North on this debate, I can’t fully support his initial arguments. I disagree with the use of the term Ponzi scheme. I don’t really consider Bitcoin to be a Ponzi scheme. North defines Ponzi scheme in his article and it seems his definition ... Why One Trader Is Long "My Favorite Ponzi Scheme..." Tyler Durden Wed, 07/29/2020 - 09:00 Via AdventuresInCapitalism.com, Let’s set some ground rules here. As far as I’m concerned, Bitcoin is a Ponzi Scheme. If you think Bitcoin is the future of money, a store of value or any other non ... Bitcoin 101 For Morons – Being Libertarian – The Bitcoin Media April 20, 2017 at 12:03 am […] Being Libertarian […] Neal Palmquist April 22, 2017 at 10:53 am. Bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme like SPAM is not a mystery meat. The suicide cult flower children will sound like libertarians when it sells bitcoin to libertarians. It will sound like ninety nine percenters when it wants to sell ... This (alleged!) bitcoin Ponzi scheme manages to be both very bitcoin and very Ponzi. All of the money was stolen by a phantom borrower! Named 'The Big One'! Recently, there has been a bit of a kerfuffle in the Austrian economics world concerning bitcoin. Gary North, a well known Austrian, wrote a series of articles calling bitcoin a Ponzi scheme. Refutations have been written by various authors arguing through the Austrian school itself.

[index] [22644] [4468] [3433] [35782] [35714] [34700] [40817] [7951] [11971] [19320]

Rickards: ‘Bitcoin is a Ponzi Scheme’ - YouTube

Bitcoin Ponzi and pyramid schemes do exist and if you fall prey to them you will suffer the consequences. In addition, bitcoins are a very new type of money. Because their value depends on how ... Talking about idiots who invest in bitcoin. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue This video breaks down why bitcoin is a ponzi scheme, why it's price fluxates, and why $100,000 bitcoin will NEVER happen. If you like my work, please considering donating to my PayPal or becoming ... In this video, I discuss whether or not Bitcoin is a Pyramid scheme or a Ponzi scheme. I conclude that it is neither, simply because: 1) Bitcoin is decentralized, not run by a corporation or ... Is Bitcoin a Ponzi Scheme? Is Bitcoin a Pyramid Scheme? Is Bitcoin a Bubble like Tulip Mania or Beanie Babies? ===== Thanks for watching! Don't f...

#