Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies seem to be embraced by libertarians who are very idealistic and have quite a shallow understanding of economics, software, and the world at large. But I repeat myself.



I think the distinct holders can be classified as such: 1) Libertarian idealists who don't recognize they've already lost control. 2) Money launderers and their developing world mining networks. 3) Speculators (including VC backed firms) 4) Hype followers 5) The few, poor, misguided fools who think it's money.


«The few, poor, misguided fools who think it's money.»

I find the opposite: people who don't "get" Bitcoin tend to not know what makes money actually money, and don't know how the current monetary system works (eg. still believe dollars are backed by gold).


Unless Bitcoin has a fundamental evolution, it cannot be a replacement for fiat currency.

I'm super excited about the crypto currency space but I firmly believe we're in the "Diamond Rio" phase of a new technology and not yet to the "iPhone" and "Android" phases.


Bitcoin does not need to, will probably not, and was never intended to completely replace fiat currency. As a cryptocurrency aficionado I think it can achieve great success and high adoption while coexisting with fiat currency.

I don't need to pay my cup of coffee in bitcoins, but Bitcoin is very useful for plenty of other use cases.


Like buying drugs, money laundering, and hoarding. So far only one of those is legal.


Bitcoin has a lot of legit use cases: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15228983


I find the claim of being able to cheaply and quickly transfer large amounts of money to be comical. The argument breaks down to, traditional transfer methods take too long, so let’s add two layers of traditional transfer methods on top of a bitcoin transfer. Then we just ignore the bid/ask spread and the transfer time on either side.


You are not thinking outside of the box: the advantages of Bitcoin multiply when you stay in bitcoins without converting to/from fiat currency.

For example my brother in France owns some bitcoins. One day he sent me, who live in the US, some bitcoins. I was able to spend them instantly (~10 minutes) on NewEgg to buy computer hardware. None of us had to convert to/from fiat. The fees were small and the transfer was incredibly fast compared to a regular bank wire.


Until you live in a bitcoim currency zone then you are just investing in a foreign currency.

You still need actual money to pay taxes and that's all a state needs to ensure it can provision the public purpose.


I think you're risking an ad hominem argument.

I'm sure that has enough truth in it. But you can characterize bankers in a similarly negative way -- particularly in light of recent economic engineering. But we all buy in to the concept of money (excuse the pun).


I've found the exact opposite to be true of a majority of cryptocurrency advocates, which makes is all that more disturbing. It's just impossible to say what the real value and future of cryptocurrencies really is.


> embraced by libertarians who are very idealistic and have quite a shallow understanding of economics, software, and the world at large

Sure, but they tend to know a lot about currency.


Anyone who thinks gold is money doesn't know very much about currency


Anything that is tradable in lieu of production is a currency. There are plenty of things far more obtuse than gold that can be and are used as currencies. Prisoners have been found to use cigarettes as currency. Hell, tide detergent can be used as a currency[0].

As something that is nearly universally traded for local fiat, gold is far more of a currency than most countries’ currencies. Only a handful of countries have currencies that are more universally accepted.

[0] http://nymag.com/news/features/tide-detergent-drugs-2013-1/




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: