Bitcoin

[slang]

Originally Posted by tw

Block chains may have use in other functions.

Some possibilities may be;

• Identity management and digital identities
• Digital voting – seems unlikely now but let’s see
• Healthcare and medical records
• Academic certificates
• Music
• Cloud storage
• Car leasing rentals
• Ride sharing
• Property
• Apartment rentals
• Travel Industry
• Loyalty reward programs
• Prdictions and gambling
• Smart contracts

Not with Bitcoin but the blockchain as you noted in your quote.

Those possible uses above are from the book Blockchain: Ultimate guide to understanding blockchain, bitcoin, cryptocurrencies, smart contracts and the future of money.

$3.00 on Kindle. Buy it. It's good. Certainly worth $3.

It’s a bit outdated now at a year and a third old but still very helpful in describing the technology and issues surrounding it’s use and possible uses.

From page 10.

“Billions of people in the world live in countries where they can’t trust intermediaries such as banks, governments, and legal systems for transactions or accurate record keeping. Blockchains are particularly useful in these cases to help provide trust and assurance to people when transacting with each other.”

It’s not just the book “Blockchains” that also see an opportunity to do something legal and useful with this technology, aside from it's use for buying gambling chips.

Kiva.org is hiring - See 1 Kiva.org jobs. Kiva.org Blockchain and Cryptocurrency company. Blockchain Protocol Architect/Director and more...


Now, having a general understanding of cryptos and their potential uses, I’m pondering how rural people here in the Philippines might cut their middle men out completely or in part by using them.

Maybe not “all in” today but it appears to be an opportunity for a grower to deal directly with a seller. The middle men here in the Philippines often get more than either the seller or the grower for products.

Most of their utility is in the delivery and payment between the two parties.

Originally Posted by tw

But not as a replacement for legal tender. It was a good try. But, currently, it does not work.

As legal tender, you’re right. But what about other legal useful possibilities? Maybe.

[tw]

Originally Posted by slang

As legal tender, you’re right. But what about other legal useful possibilities? Maybe.

Review the origins of 'plastic'. Diner's Club was created in 1949 when its founder paid for a restaurant meal with a cardboard charge card. That is all it was. A new version of 'letter of credit'.

From that was spawned something different - a credit card. The credit card was not just a 'letter of credit'. It was also a bank loan.

And then something different, called a debit card was created maybe twenty years later.

None of this is replacement for currency. It simply expands and enhances a flexible currency.

Unfortunately for Bitcoin, it has not really done much to enhance 'legal' activity. And its speculation does not address another important concept in productive economics - investment.

Where as a stock, bond, or derivative is a speculation to create new products or provide financial stability, Bitcoin speculation is only gambling. Nothing productive is generated (financed) by Bitcoin speculation.

Whereas Diner's Club was created to address a need - addressed a liquidity problem. Bitcoin has not really enhanced the currency.

Other electronic payments systems (ie Apple Pay, Paypal) do enhance the liquidity of currency. We can expect those the be enhanced / innovate / expand into new forms of economic / financial activity.

Too many foolishly see all government as evil. Some governments are. In productive societies, government is always part of a solution. Federal Reserve bank is a perfect example. Countries with the most stable currencies all over the world have Central Banks.

When the Central Bank is run by people who know, well, we all recently learned the value of a Central Bank. In 2007, we were facing symptoms of a second Great Depression. And this time, the Central Bank addressed the problem. Unlike in 1929 when the Central Bank made the problem worse.

We came that close to what would have been unemployment numbers of maybe 20%. Many today do not realize what was meant by the statement back then, "You have eight hours to save the economy." We know it was that bad. Disaster did not happen because our Central Bank, in coordination with others, properly addressed a major liquidity problem. What other 'currency' could address such problems? Even gold could not address that near disaster.

BTW, another factor essential to a stable economy - open markets.

[slang]

Originally Posted by tw

...Too many foolishly see all government as evil.

Yah, that's me. I'm that guy. Am I a fool? Maybe. A guy in Tampa called me a fool months ago. Actually he called me a foo.

Not evil but corrupt. Here are the rules. They are for YOU but not for the government. These rules are for the benefit of society. Except when they make government people rich. Then they're just rules you have to follow while I'm looting the country and smiling on TV. Talking about how much I'm doing for YOU?

But I could do more if only you'd give me more money.

Originally Posted by tw

Some governments are.

Like Russia.

Originally Posted by tw

In productive societies, government is a̶l̶w̶a̶y̶s̶ never part of a solution.

There we go. That's better.

Originally Posted by tw

..Federal Reserve bank is a perfect example. Countries with the most stable currencies all over the world have Central Banks.

Does Zimbabwe have a central bank?

Originally Posted by slang

..It's amusing to me that every government is "concerned" about fraud. Government is the source of fraud. They invented fraud. They don't want to lose control of the game that they rigged in their favor. That's every government to some degree.

I wrote that. It's a slang quote, not out of a book. Not yet anyway.

When I wright a book, I'll put that quote in it. It's a good quote. That's a good quote for China. Maybe it can be translated for my Chinese version of my book.

There is an ATM in Manila that sells Bitcoin and Litecoin for peso notes. It's the only one in the country so far. It doesn't buy coins, just sells.

500000P limit per day. No ID required either.

Do you think Trump's an asshole for wanting to dismantle the Fed?

Do you think Trump has some Bitcoin? That Putin gave him. With no traces to it? So he can pay for some TitBounce?

I wonder what you might pay for in Bitcoin in Manila. Legal stuff, I mean.

I wonder if you can pay a woman for an NDA in Bitcoin? Would it be enforceable?

How much Viagra could you buy with a whole Bitcoin? Not that I need that stuff, just wondering.

I wonder if you jammed a Bitcoin up a horses ass what the process time would be? Would it get faster or slower than normal? What would the blockchain do differently? Could you buy some gambling chips with it?

Does wifi even work from inside a horse's ass? Now there's a good question. That might be a good place to hide your Bitcoin. You might call it Horasscoin or maybe just asscoin. But what problem would it solve?

Maybe someone is working that out now. I'll look on the exchange for it.

[tw]

Originally Posted by slang

Do you think Trump's an asshole for wanting to dismantle the Fed?

An honest answer will never be discovered when one concludes using wacko extremist concepts of 'good vs evil'. When one does not first learn the so many details that separate the few corrupt from far more numerous responsible parties.

Were Central Banks evil when they created / enhanced the Great Depression in 1929? Of course not. Only fools see everything in 'good vs evil'. The Central Bank (and Hoover) made a major mistake. There was no evil. There was a serious mistake that took ten years to undo. And that we study so as to never make that mistake again.

BTW, same mismanagement (including tax cuts) in / after 2000 created a massive economic calamity in 2007 that took most of the next eight years to resolve / recover from. Was that evil? Of course not. But the mistake we all made was listen to corrupt business school graduates. Since sub-prime loans and derivatives to create free cash (a ponzi scheme) were somehow good because it was unregulated.

The naive, who see everything in 'good vs evil', were same people so easily targeted by my father. So many Americans then knew that smoking cigarettes increased health. Many people are not officer material. So they see everything in soundbytes. They know only because they were told what to think - also called brainwashing.

An informed consumer learns underlying details long before making an extremist conclusion.

We know Bitcoin will not accomplish what you want it to do. Strangely enough, Bitcoin is popular among those whose criminal activities are justified by hate of government, other religions, leaders who constantly lie, etc. Apparently that (and not improving economic activity) is related to your underlying agenda.

First indication of the most corrupt are those who routinely accuse other groups of being evil. That is how Hitler, Milosevic, Kim, and even Nixon came to or maintained power. Government is not evil. It is necessary for a productive society. That does not mean people such as Cheney will not manipulate government for a self serving agenda.

Obviously the existence of a Central Bank cannot prevent a Mugabe or Maduro. Your logic - blame a Central Bank for that corruption. Please don't mock me with that wacko extremist logic. A central bank cannot prevent corrupt leaders. But a Central Bank has been repeatedly proven essential for a stable currency.

Throughout history, currencies that remain most stable are maintained by a Central Bank. We know government must be part of a solution. Which flies in the face of extremists who are told by Hitler, Mussolini, Alex Jones, Sean Hannity, or Rush Limbaugh what to believe. Extremists never bother to learn details or ask why. They only want to be told what to believe. Then just know something must be true because it agrees with their political biases.

I heard same nonsense from so many Bernie Sanders supporters during the Democratic Convention. Details quickly identified them as extremist. Told what to believe rather than first learn how things work.

Again, it is no accident that Bitcoin is popular among the anti-everyone else extremists. Bitcoin cannot even do what credit cards do to advance mankind. It is seriously flawed for so many reasons - many already identified.

Only a wacko extremist sees all government as evil. Fails to learn that the most successful societies existed when government was doing its job.

[slang]

I’m sorry for being such a wise ass joker in the previous page, TW. You’re a smart guy with a sense of humor many times, but you are invested in your position as much as anyone else.

Your life experiences and education have led you to a completely different philosophical reality than mine.

I can accept and even respect that.

Maybe this post can out “tw” you in length if not clarity of position.

Originally Posted by tw

An honest answer will never be discovered when one concludes using wacko extremist concepts of 'good vs evil'.

You are the only person that know that is focused on the term “evil".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

When one does not first learn the so many details that separate the few corrupt from far more numerous responsible parties.

Have you ever seen this? It’s the unelected bureaucrats and the management that are working against what the people want. Slow walking. No walking. Bending the rules for their agenda, not the Peoples’.

We actually have learned the so many details But not from CNN and MSNBC.

That is why so many people view the government as corrupt.

Because despite overwhelming evidence there are no prosecutions.

This opinion of corruption in the Federal gov’t was at 38% under Obama too.

And let’s not forget the FBI

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Were Central Banks evil when they created / enhanced the Great Depression in 1929? Of course not. Only fools see everything in 'good vs evil'.

Even fools can be excused for ignorance with some education.

See below.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

The Central Bank (and Hoover) made a major mistake. There was no evil. There was a serious mistake that took ten years to undo. And that we study so as to never make that mistake again.

Not evil. Mistake, yes. But from day one the Federal Reserve System was designed to take control of the US currency out of the hands of the people. And provide stability, but only as a byproduct.

It was created by the Congress to provide the nation with a safer, more flexible, and more stable monetary and financial system.

Or you could get another opinion without vested interest.

Or get the short version here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

But the mistake we all made was listen to corrupt business school graduates. Since sub-prime loans and derivatives to create free cash (a ponzi scheme) were somehow good because it was unregulated.

Yah, yah. High falutin’ MBAs. We completely agree on that. And bean counters. Flog them all.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

The naive, who see everything in 'good vs evil', were same people so easily targeted by my father. So many Americans then knew that smoking cigarettes increased health.

Was your father a marketing excutive? A doctor? Regulator?

Not sure how to read that.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Many people are not officer material. So they see everything in soundbytes. They know only because they were told what to think - also called brainwashing.

Commissioned officer you probably mean. Non commissioned officers are often made through performance. I take your point though.

Sound bytes cannot give the appropriate detail required. If they could, my replies here on the cellar would be short.

Brainwashing? Like CNN? Or MSNBC?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

An informed consumer learns underlying details long before making an extremist conclusion.

Yes, like me. Learning about cryptos before making risky moves and losing my money.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

We know Bitcoin will not accomplish what you want it to do.

We do? Normal people all over the US appear to be buying and using crypto. Seems like they’re installing crypto ATMs at a good clip.

I’m guessing they don’t trust the online process but cash for crypto seems safer.

By creating a market for ATMs it’s also supporting business and investment in the US.

Originally Posted by tw

Strangely enough, Bitcoin is popular among those whose criminal activities are justified by hate of government, other religions, leaders who constantly lie, etc.

One would only need to search the string “Bitcoin is for criminals” to find a mix of analysis and opinion from a wide variety of sources and opinions. Oh, I bet you use Google for search.

Try DuckDuckGo.com

Did you miss this? It’s not my preferred source but seems to be something more to your liking. Except maybe this time because it seems to counter your position on Bitcoin.

Maybe you meant Monero?

It’s not unanimous, it’s a mix. Seems like your opinion has been challenged by many for a few years now.

Strangely enough, with a simple search, you could easily find information dis-proving your opinion.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Apparently that (and not improving economic activity) is related to your underlying agenda.

My underlying agenda is a more independent population. Less dependency to banks. Companies buying and selling metals to a legal market is also improving economic activity.

Money and currency that is in complete control of the population without counter party risk is appealing to me and many others. Cash, gold, silver, and to a lesser degree, crypto.

Don’t forget the US mint too. They sell Sheets of uncirculated Federal Reserve Notes ( US currency ). They seem to be working against their own interests.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

First indication of the most corrupt are those who routinely accuse other groups of being evil. That is how Hitler, Milosevic, Kim, and even Nixon came to or maintained power.

Are we talking about the concept of projection here?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Government is not evil.

Not in the beginning. In time it’s likely though. There are many unelected government bureaucrats that are corrupt. They are in the management of the most important and relied upon of American government agencies. They work together to achieve goals that may or may not be supporting the president’s agenda. The president is elected.

A few specific names are Clapper, Brennan, Comey, McCabe, Strok and Page. How could that chain of command not include Obama?

Time will tell.

[slang]

Originally Posted by tw

It is necessary for a productive society.

Yes, I absolutely agree. And in the beginning this government as well as a few others were needed. And a positive force in peoples’ lives.

Yes, absolutely.Then over time with great expansion, they become corrupt. It’s much easier on a large scale to hide misdoings. Budgets swell and there is more to lose with “interference” by the American people or their elected representatives.

Something that they do well today will most likely be swerved into something detrimental to the American people, in one way or another.

They will become political. Work against the will of the people and the law. For their own means which is always…larger government.

But only for our benefit. Not theirs.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

That does not mean people such as Cheney will not manipulate government for a self serving agenda.

Cheney for certain but don’t forget Obama too. And Clapper, and Brennan, et al.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Obviously the existence of a Central Bank cannot prevent a Mugabe or Maduro. Your logic - blame a Central Bank for that corruption.

Your promotion of the Central Bank being required led me to believe that, in your opinion, it was a pillar of virtue and respectability.

It encourages stability. Not fidelity.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Please don't mock me with that wacko extremist logic. A central bank cannot prevent corrupt leaders. But a Central Bank has been repeatedly proven essential for a stable currency.

I’m sorry that you think I’m mocking you. Instead I’m making arguments with citations and quotes and references.

You could do the same if you would like.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Throughout history, currencies that remain most stable are maintained by a Central Bank. We know government must be part of a solution.

In the beginning, yes, they do add to the stability of a currency. With time, in their plateau and decline, they are not a benefit to the population. They stray from their mandate. Exaggerate their importance and become detrimental to the people that they originally served.

In time a country doesn’t have a government, a government has a country. It’s a natural progression.

Originally Posted by tw

Which flies in the face of extremists who are told by Hitler, Mussolini, Alex Jones, Sean Hannity, or Rush Limbaugh what to believe.

Have you ever watched an entire Hannity program? Have you vetted his sources? Not by reading a Soros funded website, but actually looking through his citations?

Ok, ok, he’s a bit ridiculous. Have you ever listened to Rush Limballs? Not the soundbytes, we’ve talked about those already. Sound bytes are not for people of officer material. We already agreed on that.

Rachel Maddow has a very popular program. Or she did until the Mueller report exonerated Trump. She’s not persuasive to me but interesting to watch.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Extremists never bother to learn details or ask why. They only want to be told what to believe.

That’s probably your observation. Or are you talking about radical left wing democrats?

You have to be cautious about who you listen to and what their agendas are. Like CNN And MSNBC

One could end up believing some demonstrably false ideas if they aren’t skeptical.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Then just know something must be true because it agrees with their political biases.

We completely agree on this issue. It’s rampant and it doesn’t seem to be going away.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

I heard same nonsense from so many Bernie Sanders supporters during the Democratic Convention. Details quickly identified them as extremist. Told what to believe rather than first learn how things work.

Completely agree.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by tw

Again, it is no accident that Bitcoin is popular among the anti-everyone else extremists. Bitcoin cannot even do what credit cards do to advance mankind.

Not yet but there’s still time. Bitcoin is abused. It doesn’t seem to be burdening people with high interest debt, at this time anyway. Cards have reached a trillion bucks of debt. How much in questionable payments has Bitcoin provided?

Bitcoin has ripped people off but it’s nowhere near the amount of money that card debt has saddled people with. One trillion is one million times one million.

It is true that credit cards are a big benefit to many people. I’ve benefitted from them too. They are convenient many times. They do have a tendency to be issued with a limit that is not suited appropriately for the applicant.

Are these lenders criminals? Not from my experience. I spent their card money. It was difficult to pay back though. They even upped my limit as I was working to pay it off and cancel the card. Again, it was my lack of discipline that created my problem. And it’s long since done.

Originally Posted by tw

It is seriously flawed for so many reasons - many already identified.

It is flawed. And it’s abused. It does appear that its’ popularity is growing though.Why would that be since it’s so flawed? Even a third world country like the Philippines has a Bitcoin ATM.

Originally Posted by tw

Only a wacko extremist sees all government as evil. Fails to learn that the most successful societies existed when government was doing its job.

The Florida DMV was effectively doing it’s job when I needed their assistance last year. I don’t believe that they are evil. They’re small.

[tw]

Originally Posted by slang

Yes, absolutely.Then over time with great expansion, they become corrupt. It’s much easier on a large scale to hide misdoings. Budgets swell and there is more to lose with “interference” by the American people or their elected representatives.

One factor was observed throughout history. Many leaders become corrupt after ten years. The soundbyte is "power corrupts". But many exceptions exist. King Hussein of Jordan was one. Queen Victoria apparently was another. Omar al-Bashir of Sudan is the current perfect example of why government no longer serves it function - to work for the nation. And why term limits have been so useful.

Term limits may be necessary even in Vatican City.


Forces always have a dark side - not just in Star Wars. A credit card is a powerful tool because it make borrowing so easy - as needed. Unfortunately, many use it like an alcoholic. That is the dark side. If one cannot pay off his balance at the end of a month, then he must stop using that card. Some just cannot. Meaning they will remain debtors their entire life.

Same applies to derivatives. Future contracts are so essential to provide, for example, stability for farmers. In the oil industry, futures are a powerful tool that informs all in the world that supply and demand are working (or not). Causing even the most greedy to work for the benefit of all (and to sometimes reap a massive profit in doing so).

The dark side? We all saw it when Enron intentionally created an energy shortage. Or the near economic disaster in 2007. In these cases, the problem was (in part) trading under the table - not in open and regulated markets. There are cases where some business must be conducted privately. But a majority of economic activity must be done in open markets when regulation means all counter parties (can) prosper. The only good business deal is when both parties prosper.

What made broadband possible? Regulation. Not regulation to restrict business. Regulations that halted the strifling of broadband communication.

DSL existed when the IBM PC came about. Modems in IBM PCs could only do 1200 baud. DSL could do about 1,000,000 baud. We could not have it for 15 years because companies all but conspired to stifle it. That 1981 technology was withheld for 15 years - until finally liberated by laws - the 1996 Federal Communication Act.

More laws can be good or bad. One cannot make blanket conclusions (as too many do). Government, laws, and leaders determine whether the 'powers that be' advance or stifle mankind. The devil is in the details - and not in a philosophy.

BTW, Bitcoin's major contribution to mankind: it was an experiment. It demonstrated what can happen. But also demonstrated the limit, potential corruption, and weaknesses. Like 'letters of credit' eventually created bank checks. Like Diner's Club eventually resulted in credit cards and Paypal. Well, Bitcoin is necessary to discover if that concept can / might work and what has not yet / must be solved.

[slang]

You should have bought something illegal on the dark web. That's what Bitcoin is for, you know.