Bitcoin giveaway! :)

[Gumby]

Ok, i can easily trasnfer a bag of poop in a jar. Does that make it valuable?

[Kshartle]

And let me ask you this, Kshartle: Do you believe that the single, solitary reason why people acquire dollars is because the government would shoot them if they didn't have enough to pay their taxes?

And if the government hypothetically stopped collecting taxes but kept printing dollars, would you immediately exchange every dollar you had for gold? Would you expect everyone else to do the same thing? What would be your reaction if they didn't? Can you even conceive of a world in which they didn't?

You are required by law to accept them as payment of debts.

The only support for the slips of paper is the government decree. Does anyone take slips of paper backed by nothing and no government in exchange for something of value anywhere? If so...I would like to meet them and see if I can trade slips of paper for their stuff.

This is my point about bitcoin. This is what I think is happening. People are trading things of value for electronic slips of paper that are backed by nothing of value nor a government. I think they are doing it becuase they think the price will keep going up. The only thing fueling the rise is the belief. That is fundamentally different from dollars or gold.

If I'm wrong and there's another reason I'm all ears.

there may be something to the contrary view that, not being backed by government force or subject to bankster manipulation for the benefit of banksters, actually improves there "value" (what ever that may be) over government fiat.

i don't own any bit coins BTW.. but i have been a fan and watched their development from the beginning

Listen I fully support real money that has nothing to do with violence or governments or subject to massive counterfeiting. I just don't think that something with no intrinsic or extrinsic value can last as money. Ironically it's the ability to escape goverment observation that provided the initial lift. Imagine if bitcoin succeeding in supplanting the fiat currencies and they went away....who would want them then? What good would they be at all?

[Kshartle]

Ok, i can easily trasnfer a bag of poop in a jar. Does that make it valuable?

I try to provide easily understood examples to avoid confusion and cut to the heart of the matter, not insult anyone's intelligence. Also I think the example is funny. Imagine trading something valuable like narcotics or guns and getting paid in poop in a jar.

[Pointedstick]

It's definately easier to trasnfer a ditigal....whatever than a mountain....but my point is the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable.

It does to me. And it does to other people who hold Bitcoins. Value is determined individually, by people. You may not think that easy transmissibility is valuable, but I and many others disagree. That doesn't make either of us wrong, but it does mean that we have arrived at different conclusions. And the fact that we have been able to reach different conclusions means that your blanket declarative statement that "the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable" is incorrect. That statement is your own personal opinion, not a fact, and it is an opinion that I and many others disagree with.

Ok, i can easily trasnfer a bag of poop in a jar. Does that make it valuable? It's very easy to box it up and mail it to someone. Not as easy as bitcoin but still very very easy. How does that make the jar of poop valuable? I guess it's fertilizer!

I feel like you just ignored everything I said.

If you grew up in a hypothetical bizarre village society where poop in a jar was the currency, and 99.9% of people had been raised to believe that poop in a jar had value proportionate to how smelly it was (ew), the yes, it would have value to those people. It would not have value to someone outside of the poop-trading society because they would have other beliefs and value different things.

Do you not understand the concept of people having different scales of value? The poop-traders find the poop to be valuable; non-poop-traders do not. Who's right? It's not about being right or wrong: how can anyone tell another person that their internal beliefs about the value of things is right or wrong? We're talking about opinions, here. Facts can be right or wrong; opinions can't.

[Kshartle]

It does to me. And it does to other people who hold Bitcoins. Value is determined individually, by people. You may not think that easy transmissibility is valuable, but I and many others disagree. That doesn't make either of us wrong, but it does mean that we have arrived at different conclusions. And the fact that we have been able to reach different conclusions means that your blanket declarative statement that "the ability to transfer something easily doesn't make it valuable" is incorrect. That statement is your own personal opinion, not a fact, and it is an opinion that I and many others disagree with.

Ok, i can easily trasnfer a bag of poop in a jar. Does that make it valuable? It's very easy to box it up and mail it to someone. Not as easy as bitcoin but still very very easy. How does that make the jar of poop valuable? I guess it's fertilizer!

I feel like you just ignored everything I said.

No I definately didn't, I just disagreed. I said the ability to easily transfer ownership cannot make something valueable and you said it's your opinion that it does. Well.....I can easily transfer a jar of poop but it's still basically worthless so the ability to easily transfer ownership clearly doesn't make something valuable. I feel like your'e ignoring this point. It has nothing to do with villages and smelliness.....just the ability to transfer.

This isn't a matter of opinion. The value of something is subjective yes. There are objective characteristics though that people either do value or do not value. If something here on Earth would magically turn to gold if ran through the atmosphere of jupiter that wouldn't give it any value because there's no way to send it there and get it back. That's objective.

The same principle is at work with the poop. I can transfer it easily, but it's still not anymore valuable. The ease of transfer does not create value with poop or anything else...including bitcoin. It might make it more viable as a medium of exchange since it is easy...but it doesn't give it value.

[Kshartle]

Listen I fully support real money that has nothing to do with violence or governments or subject to massive counterfeiting. I just don't think that something with no intrinsic or extrinsic value can last as money. Ironically it's the ability to escape goverment observation that provided the initial lift. Imagine if bitcoin succeeding in supplanting the fiat currencies and they went away....who would want them then? What good would they be at all?

if they supplant all other fiat dollars they would be an international non government controlled means of exchange, used by everybody to buy and sell everything..  and they would still be fiat and worth a jar of poop minus the jar and the bag   just like government dollars are/would be absent fear of the gun..

i think pointedstick may have nailed it in his post on memes, it a question of resilience and potential for resilience

Well they wouldn't be fiat, I don't know why we can't slay this dragon. Bitcoins ain't fiat.

[Pointedstick]

No I definately didn't, I just disagreed. I said the ability to easily transfer ownership cannot make something valueable and you said it's your opinion that it does. Well.....I can easily transfer a jar of poop but it's still basically worthless so the ability to easily transfer ownership clearly doesn't make something valuable. I feel like your'e ignoring this point. It has nothing to do with villages and smelliness.....just the ability to transfer.

If the villagers believe it's valuable because for them it's a means of exchange that lets them avoid barter, are they wrong?

[Kshartle]

Thanks for answering my questions PS. I think we're going in circles at this point but if you want to continue that's fine. I just wanted to hear from people who have them why they are holding them. Anyone else that wants to explain why they think BTC has value please chime in.

[Kshartle]

No I definately didn't, I just disagreed. I said the ability to easily transfer ownership cannot make something valueable and you said it's your opinion that it does. Well.....I can easily transfer a jar of poop but it's still basically worthless so the ability to easily transfer ownership clearly doesn't make something valuable. I feel like your'e ignoring this point. It has nothing to do with villages and smelliness.....just the ability to transfer.

If the villagers believe it's valuable because for them it's a means of exchange that lets them avoid barter, are they wrong?

It's a medimum of exchange because it has value....it doesn't have value because it's a medium of exchange. We can exchange anything. If something is valueless it's not going to survive as a medium of exchange....at some point it will be rejected once everyone realizes there is no value.

The fact you can exchange it doesn't make it valuable, the fact that it's easy to transfer doesn't make it valuable. I think the poop in a jar, right here, right now proves that. I can transfer it and I can exchange it but neither makes it valuable.

Yes a belief that something has value can persist even when it has none......but long can it last?

I think we're on repeat now.............

[Pointedstick]

Thanks for answering my questions PS. I think we're going in circles at this point but if you want to continue that's fine. I just wanted to hear from people who have them why they are holding them. Anyone else that wants to explain why they think BTC has value please chime in.

We've told you over and over again: we think it has value because it's a good medium of exchange. You have a lot of difficulty with this concept and keep insisting that it must have some other value that makes us want to use it as a medium of exchange. Sorry, no. It may seem bizarre and fantastical to you, but those of us who want to use Bitcoins as a currency and not just a speculative investment do so out of the belief that its inherent traits make it a good medium of exchange, that's really all there is to it.

[Gumby]

Well they wouldn't be fiat, I don't know why we can't slay this dragon. Bitcoins ain't fiat.

why wouldn't it be fiat? the only difference i can see is that they are private tender instead of government 

Fiat Currency that a government has declared to be legal tender, despite the fact that it has no intrinsic value and is not backed by reserves.

  neither one is backed by reserves

Traditionally, "fiat" money was state issued/mandated money(it literally means, "let it be done", "it shall be" in Latin). However, Wikipedia claims it can also apply to money without intrinsic value:

Fiat money has been defined variously as:

* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.
* money without intrinsic value

While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

[Kshartle]

No I definately didn't, I just disagreed. I said the ability to easily transfer ownership cannot make something valueable and you said it's your opinion that it does. Well.....I can easily transfer a jar of poop but it's still basically worthless so the ability to easily transfer ownership clearly doesn't make something valuable. I feel like your'e ignoring this point. It has nothing to do with villages and smelliness.....just the ability to transfer.

If the villagers believe it's valuable because for them it's a means of exchange that lets them avoid barter, are they wrong?

Yes they would be wrong. I can fill a bunch of jars with poop to prove it. I will trade it for their valuable stuff. They be left with poop and I will be left with valuable stuff.

I will need help filling the jars.....I will pay you in bitcoins for poop that I will trade with the villagers for valuable stuff.

[Gumby]

those of us who want to use Bitcoins as a currency and not just a speculative investment

I'm sure I missed this, PS, but do you prefer to hoard your Bitcoins (since the price may be rising dramatically) or do you prefer to spend them whenever someone will accept them?

[Pointedstick]

If the villagers believe it's valuable because for them it's a means of exchange that lets them avoid barter, are they wrong?

Yes they would be wrong. I can fill a bunch of jars with poop to prove it. I will trade it for their valuable stuff. They be left with poop and I will be left with valuable stuff.

I will need help filling the jars.....I will pay you in bitcoins for poop that I will trade with the villagers for valuable stuff.

How would your act of increasing their money supply prove that they were wrong in their estimation that poop in jars has value as currency?

It sounds an awful lot like you're saying that people's opinions are wrong. I don't believe it's possible for an opinion to be wrong. I think only facts can be wrong.

[Pointedstick]

those of us who want to use Bitcoins as a currency and not just a speculative investment

I'm sure I missed this, PS, but do you prefer to hoard your Bitcoins (since the price may be rising dramatically) or do you prefer to spend them whenever someone will accept them?

I keep a bunch as a speculation, but I've also spent some. On on hand, you could say, "you idiot, you should have kept them because they'd be worth so much more now!" But on the other hand, the T-shirt I bought may outlast my Bitcoins by many many years.

[Gumby]

those of us who want to use Bitcoins as a currency and not just a speculative investment

I'm sure I missed this, PS, but do you prefer to hoard your Bitcoins (since the price may be rising dramatically) or do you prefer to spend them whenever someone will accept them?

I keep a bunch as a speculation, but I've also spent some. On on hand, you could say, "you idiot, you should have kept them because they'd be worth so much more now!" But on the other hand, the T-shirt I bought may outlast my Bitcoins by many many years.

So, if you've only bought a T-Shirt or so, and hoard the rest for speculation, then it sounds like you really don't "want to use bitcoin as a currency right now".

[Kshartle]

Well they wouldn't be fiat, I don't know why we can't slay this dragon. Bitcoins ain't fiat.

why wouldn't it be fiat? the only difference i can see is that they are private tender instead of government 

Fiat Currency that a government has declared to be legal tender, despite the fact that it has no intrinsic value and is not backed by reserves.

  neither one is backed by reserves

Traditionally, "fiat" money was state issued/mandated money(it literally means, "let it be done", "it shall be" in Latin). However, Wikipedia claims it can also apply to money without intrinsic value:

Fiat money has been defined variously as:

* any money declared by a government to be legal tender.
* state-issued money which is neither convertible by law to any other thing, nor fixed in value in terms of any objective standard.
* money without intrinsic value

While gold- or silver-backed representative money entails the legal requirement that the bank of issue redeem it in fixed weights of gold or silver, fiat money's value is unrelated to the value of any physical quantity. Even a coin containing valuable metal may be considered fiat currency if its face value is higher than its market value as metal.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

Well then any worthless thing people exchange for something of value would now be called FIAT money. This is ridiculous. FIAT money is intrinsically valueless items or whatever that are treated as money due to government decree or fiat. This is obviously not bitcoin.

This re-defining of the term confuses the issue. Wikipedia has this wrong. I wonder if Webster's has changed as well.

At any rate...it's obvious dollars and bitcoin are not the same. The original definition of FIAT money makes defining their difference simple. Dollars are fiat, they are money because the government declares them to be. It is illegal to not recognize them as such. You are forced by law to accept them for remittance of debts. This is not the case with bitcoin. They both share the characteristic that they have no intrinsic value but bitcoins are not money by government fiat, hence they are not fiat money.

sounds like the semantics haven't caught up with the reality's of private currencies, if calling it a "private non reserve currency" works better or makes more sense than the more generalized (not backed by reserves) definition of fiat, then we can use that definition..

[Pointedstick]

I'm sure I missed this, PS, but do you prefer to hoard your Bitcoins (since the price may be rising dramatically) or do you prefer to spend them whenever someone will accept them?

I keep a bunch as a speculation, but I've also spent some. On on hand, you could say, "you idiot, you should have kept them because they'd be worth so much more now!" But on the other hand, the T-shirt I bought may outlast my Bitcoins by many many years.

So, if you've only bought a T-Shirt or so, and hoard the rest for speculation, then it sounds like you really don't "want to use bitcoin as a currency right now".

There was more than a T-shirt. I've bought a few things. One of the problems is that most places that sell things I want to buy don't yet accept Bitcoins, although this is improving all the time.

But I'll admit it's highly speculative. My speculation has less to to purely with future appreciation but that I want to have some Bitcoins if it ever achieves status as a widely-used currency. It's a great medium of exchange in some ways (easy transmissibility, infinite divisibility) and not so great in other ways (high volatility, not many places accept it as payment yet). I'm speculating that the latter two disadvantages will eventually disappear.

[Kshartle]

If the villagers believe it's valuable because for them it's a means of exchange that lets them avoid barter, are they wrong?

Yes they would be wrong. I can fill a bunch of jars with poop to prove it. I will trade it for their valuable stuff. They be left with poop and I will be left with valuable stuff.

I will need help filling the jars.....I will pay you in bitcoins for poop that I will trade with the villagers for valuable stuff.

How would your act of increasing their money supply prove that they were wrong in their estimation that poop in jars has value as currency?

It sounds an awful lot like you're saying that people's opinions are wrong. I don't believe it's possible for an opinion to be wrong. I think only facts can be wrong.

The fact is I can prove their opinoin about poop being valuable is wrong. If I poop in enough jars and get all their stuff and they're left with a bunch of poop....well what then....are they going to have poop fights? I know it's not worth anything....so now when they want to rent their huts back from me I just say you need to pay me in animal skins....gold you mine...virgins....pretty much all the good stuff....not poop. I'm sorry but you got suckered.

The Native Americans had the opinion that beads were worth more than long island. Was their opinion correct? (I have not studied this, but I think the point is clear).

[Gumby]

Got it. And I totally believe that you enjoy the idea of using bitcoins. But, the data is suggesting that most accounts are dormant — which implies that most bitcoin holders are less interested in using bitcoins and are more interested in speculation.

I don't think most bitcoin holders have shown a desire to use their bitcoins for purchases just yet. And it's still unclear if they ever will.

I suppose you can argue that there aren't enough things for sale in bitcoins yet, but that implies to me that only nerdy speculators are accepting payment in bitcoins right now (so they can hoard them)

[dualstow]

The Native Americans had the opinion that beads were worth more than long island. Was their opinion correct? (I have not studied this, but I think the point is clear).

Just a side note: the native Americans didn't think they were selling the island. They thought they were receiving some sort of tribute in exchange for use of the island, believing that they would be allowed to continue to share it. At least, that's what I've read.

[Pointedstick]

How would your act of increasing their money supply prove that they were wrong in their estimation that poop in jars has value as currency?

It sounds an awful lot like you're saying that people's opinions are wrong. I don't believe it's possible for an opinion to be wrong. I think only facts can be wrong.

The fact is I can prove their opinoin about poop being valuable is wrong. If I poop in enough jars and get all their stuff and they're left with a bunch of poop....well what then....are they going to have poop fights? I know it's not worth anything....so now when they want to rent their huts back from me I just say you need to pay me in animal skins....gold you mine...virgins....pretty much all the good stuff....not poop. I'm sorry but you got suckered.

I don't think it would actually play out the way you think it would, but for the sake of argument, if it did, I still don't see how it would make them wrong. It would certainly make you clever for manipulating their system and putting them at your mercy, but I still don't see how they would actually be wrong. Maybe the poop-in-jars currency would turn out to be a foolish idea. But that's not the same thing as them being wrong in their belief that poop in jars had value for exchange. Do you see the distinction?

The Native Americans had the opinion that beads were worth more than long island. Was their opinion correct? (I have not studied this, but I think the point is clear).

So you believe it is possible to have incorrect opinions? My opinion is that Ford is better them GM and Mac is better than PC. Am I wrong? Prove it!

[Kshartle]

How would your act of increasing their money supply prove that they were wrong in their estimation that poop in jars has value as currency?

It sounds an awful lot like you're saying that people's opinions are wrong. I don't believe it's possible for an opinion to be wrong. I think only facts can be wrong.

The fact is I can prove their opinoin about poop being valuable is wrong. If I poop in enough jars and get all their stuff and they're left with a bunch of poop....well what then....are they going to have poop fights? I know it's not worth anything....so now when they want to rent their huts back from me I just say you need to pay me in animal skins....gold you mine...virgins....pretty much all the good stuff....not poop. I'm sorry but you got suckered.

I don't think it would actually play out the way you think it would, but for the sake of argument, if it did, I still don't see how it would make them wrong. It would certainly make you clever for manipulating their system and putting them at your mercy, but I still don't see how they would actually be wrong. Maybe the poop-in-jars currency would turn out to be a foolish idea. But that's not the same thing as them being wrong in their belief that poop in jars had value for exchange. Do you see the distinction?

If a belief turns out to be foolish, doesn't that mean it was wrong? It sounds like you're saying beliefs can't be wrong.

If I believed that buying a condo here in Florida in 2006 was a great idea......isn't it obvious that I was wrong? How is that different from trading valuable stuff for poop that turns out to be worthless? Aren't they both wrong?

[Kshartle]

So you believe it is possible to have incorrect opinions? My opinion is that Ford is better them GM and Mac is better than PC. Am I wrong? Prove it!

It's my opinion that gold is going to go up in dollar price next year. Do you think my opinion can be wrong?

[Pointedstick]

If a belief turns out to be foolish, doesn't that mean it was wrong? It sounds like you're saying beliefs can't be wrong.

If I believed that buying a condo here in Florida in 2006 was a great idea......isn't it obvious that I was wrong? How is that different from trading valuable stuff for poop that turns out to be worthless? Aren't they both wrong?

Well let me back up a bit.

It's possible to be wrong of course. And it's possible to believe things that turn out to be wrong. But, and I realize this is kind of splitting hairs, I think there's a difference between believing something that turns out to be wrong and having an opinion on a subjective matter that turns out to cause problems for you.

I mean, we're talking about personal value scales here. This is Marginal Utility Theory 101. If you value gold, and I am a villager who values poop jars, is either of us wrong to value those things? You can say that I would be wrong as demonstrated by your ability to poop in jars and theoretically buy all the stuff owned by me and my fellow villagers, but what if we all prayed to a god who was actually able to transmute wood to gold and we flooded the market with gold and bought all your stuff and all your friends' stuff? Would you be wrong to have valued gold? My point is, just because people's personal value scales may cause them problems, I don't think they can be objectively judged to be right or wrong, or of they can, it has to be a moral level (i.e. we would all think that someone who has "exterminating the Jews" at the top of their value scale is morally wrong).