
Bitcoin swings as civil war looms - eclipse31
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-40654194
======
sillysaurus3
This article is delusional if it thinks the swings have anything to do with
the bitcoin civil war. Bitcoin has _always_ been volatile, and will continue
to be volatile. It's a gambler's currency.

People always try to assign a reason to things. We don't like accepting that
there just aren't any reasons. But as someone who has seen bitcoin go up and
down and back again over years, there really isn't a reason for it besides
"people decided to buy or sell." And those people aren't operating with logic.
It's speculation.

People were saying the exact same things about Silk Road. If Silk Road closes,
bitcoin will go down! Nope, didn't happen.

~~~
cloakandswagger
I think you're underestimating just how big a deal the split was. It could
have lead to Bitcoin being split into two distinct currencies, and this was
happening on a very short and defined timeline (July 21st and August).

The swings absolutely were caused by anxiety/relief around this event.

~~~
revmoo
Not a chance. The volatility surrounding this event was at or below the normal
levels of BTC volatility.

------
LAMike
Has anyone noticed a paradigm shift in the way Bitcoin and Ethereum are
treated on HN?

~~~
cloakandswagger
Nope, it still seems as hostile as ever. Every top voted comment on a thread
concerning crypto will be people cheering its inevitable demise and mocking
its naive supporters.

I can only imagine it's a mixture of jealousy and sour grapes from missing out
on crypto's rise, but it feels strange that a forum dedicated to tech is so
angry and dismissive towards a really interesting new technology.

~~~
and0
I think it's incredibly interesting and the the tech / concept is extremely
impressive. (We still don't even know who thought this up, do we?)

That being said, I'm one of the people who have always mocked bitcoin. There
are so many obvious problems with it, and some of the people in the cult built
around it lack a hilarious amount of self-awareness.

Congrats to those who speculated successfully regardless. I'm not salty about
people who jumped on $AMD over a year ago, or any tulips throughout history.

~~~
rothbardrand
Consider that those "obvious problems" (which you don't name) may be
misunderstandings on your part, of the technology, or how economics works on a
global scale.

Bitcoin is a very well designed crypto-economic system. It took smart work
from people with backgrounds and understanding in both.

It's easy to mock because it's different from the standard quo and Statists
seem to think that Only government can do money properly (which is kinda funny
when you think about it) and so the criticism of bitcoin that I've seen has
never been very good.

~~~
and0
I didn't name the obvious problems because they've been talked over to death
at this point, typically in that most-upvoted first post you mentioned
initially.

I think the largest issue with Bitcoin is precisely what you probably admire
it for, judging by your description of its detractors: I don't think the
average consumer wants an unregulated currency. People like having a central
authority that enforces laws around their currency. People enjoy the benefits
of a dollar that doesn't fluctuate wildly in value. People enjoy the
conveniences of modern banking systems.

There's a tendency for libertarians to ignore very obvious examples of
contradictions in their world view, because any of these examples can be
dismissed using random ideological purity tests. Namely, the idea that the
market is entirely separate from the government, or that a government formed
by (often very imperfect) representative democracy or even brute force is any
less pure of a "force" than market forces.

Modern financial systems developed largely because people wanted them.
Consumer protections laws were implemented because people voted for them and
would be very upset if they were taken away. People who step into voting
booths are still "rational actors". People who disagree with your world view
(just about literally everyone) are still rational actors.

At the end of the day advocates of cryptocurrency have tried everything to get
people to start using or accepting Bitcoin and no one has, despite no real
government intervention. Hell, the whole point of your original post was to
lament that the most popular opinion is that cryptocurrency is dumb. The
market has said no, why have you not started listening?

(Also: Mining is massively wasteful. Transactions are expensive. It's overtly
complicated and unpleasant to handle. A lot of people lose all their money
because sites get hacked. Also, all the issues brought up by this whole
forking incident.)

~~~
MarkPNeyer
> People like having a central authority that enforces laws around their
> currency.

I think most people don't give a damn about this or think about it one way or
the other. It's too abstract for them to think about. Most people use dollars
without thinking about what they are or where they come from.

> People enjoy the benefits of a dollar that doesn't fluctuate wildly in value

Yes, this much is true. Of course, if you hold bitcoin constant, you could
claim it's the dollar that fluctuates wildly. If reality itself is unstable,
than a stable currency starts to look more like a clever trick than something
that is real and maintainable.

If you told people "the dollar is stable, but at the small cost of rapid
centralization of wealth under the control of extremely powerful actors who
aren't accountable to the law", they might see things differently.

What if all our political stability has, at its root, become a result of
volatility moving out of the financial sector and into basically every other
facet of human existence?

> . People enjoy the conveniences of modern banking systems.

I think you underestimate how much people hate modern banking, which does not
give a shit about consumers. They're sick of paying fees to access their own
money.

> At the end of the day advocates of concurrency have tried everything to get
> people to start using or accepting Bitcoin and no one has, despite no real
> government intervention.

I don't think you really understand the goals of this group. Many of these
people don't give a damn if others use bitcoin for transactions, and they have
no real interest in using it themselves. Yes, some people want it to replace
the dollar in day to day transactions. Others are content for a store of value
that has a tendency to appreciate over the long term.

> The market has said no,

Transaction volume has grown tremendously in the past few years. How is this
the market saying "no?"

[https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all](https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all)

Do you think "there's just a bunch of greater and greater fools, all passing
around a potato that surely will blow up any day now?"

It's honestly hard to understand your perspective here. If it's still around
in a few years, will you still think it's all fools speculating? What kind of
evidence would change your mind on this?

~~~
and0
Most people don't think about the value of the dollar or the conveniences of
modern banking because it's become such a transparent part of our daily lives.
That would very obviously change if it went away.

I also lament the "rapid centralization of wealth" but fail to see how Bitcoin
or your worldview in general (as the opposite of a "Statist", I'm assuming)
would do anything except accelerate this process.

Most people don't hate modern banking. Most people also don't pay fees to
access their own money, except ATM fees (which are often reimbursed). This is
a problem with banks anyway, aka the free market, not fiat. If banks are "too
abstract for [most people] to think about" I don't see how they could figure
out managing bitcoin, and would likely defer to private banking institutions
for Bitcoin as well. Hell, they people already do store Bitcoin wallets in
centralized systems, with often hilariously poor results.

Pro tip: when your arguments are to literally start questioning reality,
you've lost. However it is refreshing to see a libertarian actually admit the
sort of mental gymnastics their worldview requires.

Also, judging by the wild fluctuations in transactions day-to-day, I'm
assuming this is all trading volume. I remember when a few legitimate
businesses started accepting Bitcoin (Newegg, and uh.. that one taco place?)
and I'm not seeing any real correlation where it should matter.

~~~
MarkPNeyer
> Pro tip: when your arguments are to literally start questioning reality

Saying "reality isn't stable" is a description of the dynamics of reality, not
a claim that realty doesn't exist.

> However it is refreshing to see a libertarian actually admit the sort of
> mental gymnastics their worldview requires.

I've yet to see any evidence you think would change your view.

The evidence that would change my view on this is simple: bitcoin fails
completely, with a price going to zero.

Is there evidence that would change your view?

~~~
and0
If someone found a valid use-case or actual market for Bitcoin outside of
speculation that provided real value to everyday people. Or if the myriad of
issues I've brought up had a solution and wouldn't just get worse with at
scale. Until then, it's Beanie Babies with some cool math.

But I can also think in terms of hypotheticals and don't require Bitcoin fail
entirely (or the USD to behave perfectly) to judge it, or tell that it's
current value is tied to ideological and/or speculative wishfulness.

------
kanzure
duuuupes, feed me dupes

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758587](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14758587)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14788663)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14809259](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14809259)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14812445](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14812445)

------
brink
I guess "civil war" sounds a lot more interesting than a hard fork, an
unlikely split and people trying to capitalize on the drama.

------
VikingCoder
It's almost like it should be two different blockchain crypto currencies, with
different goals, but possibly very similar implementations.

/sigh

