Cryptocurrency as the next significant stage for computing technology, not just an investment

[zlemflolia]

1) The tax situation where every single crypto exchange involving fiat or alternative cryptocurrencies is now considered a taxable event.  This has nothing to do with the technology of cryptocurrencies themselves, and everything to do with the tax situation itself.  The bad tax situation is not a reason why cryptocurrencies are not good because it has nothing to do with cryptocurrencies and only applies in countries like the US that try to treat them that way

 

2) This is an argument against fiat currency not crytocurrency.  With cryptocurrencies this would never happen.  Your argument is essentially "cryptocurrencies are not yet the one true silver bullet because the Venezuelan infrastructure is not ready for them yet" which is fair enough but that's due to the current circumstance not the nature of crypto itself

 

3) Still not sure why you're bringing this up but I assume it's still in your comparison to fiat inflationary devaluation.  Nothing was created out of nothing because blockchain hard forks only have value if people think they do.  This is a zero sum game and value did not magically appear, people simply think those hard forks are worth exchanging fiat for so they do it.  An increasing in crypto holdings due to a hard fork is more analogous to a dividend payout than fiat production inflation.  

 

Fiat inflation = more fiat is produced therefore your existing fiat is worth less

Crypto hard forks = there is a new hard fork off the old blockchain, the vast majority of which are worthless, but some have values are new currencies in their own right and holders of the original now have assets in both chains.  If you think this is an issue then fair enough, but no value is being magically created since they only have value if people buy them, and in those two cases they did.  

 

4) Crypto holders do not inherent get a boost in the fiat valuations of their crypto stash from hard forks - they only do if people think those hard forks are valuable.  I never said crypto hard forks devalue existing fiat, I said inflationary fiat money printing devalues fiat, and there is no such analogous situation within deflationary cryptocurrencies.  This is economics 101

 

6) Fiat currencies are backed by the full force of their respective countries, fair enough - and this is often good enough.  But it's not perfect, and cryptocurrencies are perfect in that regard with respect to the lack of inflationary fiat printing for currency devaluation purposes for the purposes of paying off national debt.  The crypto market is indeed undervalued right now, thanks for making that excellent point

 

6) It's a payment processor which uses a centralized database to track credits which are paid for initially through fiat.  Whatever, this is a semantics point anyway and regardless it's still far inferior to cryptocurrencies but has still proven that widespread adoption is completely possible.

[chenGOD]

1) Why is that a “bad tax situation”?

 

2) This is inherent in markets. Bread will not cost the same around the world regardless of it being priced in fiat or some crypto.

 

3) Nothin to do with inflation (which by the way doesn’t always equal devaluation). Simply that you said no value was created out of nothing in crypto earlier in the thread (or words to that effect), but I’m illustrating this is simply not true.

 

4) You’re saying the opposite of what you said earlier. Make up your mind. Also, not all cryptos are deflationary.

 

5) Ever heard the saying “don’t let perfect be the enemy of good”. The crypto market is undervalued with respect to fiat? But I thought you wanted to replace fiat with crypto. Which is it man - you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

 

6) Widespread adoption of a payment processor? That’s not really a technological leap.

 

Again, blockchain tech offers a lot of positive things. Crypto currencies can be useful in some situations, but they are inherently susceptible to the whims of a few people (or coalitions), are only backed by the belief of people that they have value, and are susceptible to being hacked. Plus the markets are completely manipulated - see how the BTC futures markets have turned out for small investors.

[zlemflolia]

1) Every single crypto transaction being a taxable event and how unsustainable that is, in comparison to fiat not being a taxable event every single time you do a transaction using it based on the foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations

 

2) Hyper inflation is not inherent in markets.  I don't know what you're even talking about here

 

3) Inflation always equals devaluation by definition.  There is a higher supply of the fiat therefore it is worth less.  And it is true that no value is created out of nothing in hard forks, I already gave you a very detailed explanation of why no value is being created out of nothing with hard forks but I guess you didn't understand it so whatever

 

4) I'm not contradicting anything you're just not understanding the minutiae of the topic at hand here.  I stated exactly what I stated before in different words.  I never said they all are and that's irrelevant.  They are the only currencies capable of guaranteeing their deflationary qualities - no nation state can guarantee it won't inflate its fiat by printing more.

 

5) I don't know what you're responding to but it's not my post.  What imperfect thing am I making the enemy of what good thing?

 

6) I never said it's a technological leap in fact I specifically stated in my post that it's basically analogous to a centralized shitcoin, but it's just an example of something kind of like crypto becoming popular in a developing nation

 

Anyway I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore because you're never staying on topic.  All of these bullet points have diverged from the original topic every time I reply and you're either straw manning me or not discussing the topic at hand.  Maybe some readers will gain something from it but I don't feel like making these long replies to you anymore since you're basically:

a) Not understanding the topic being discussed, and demonstrating that with your refutations which don't even make sense and are just wrong and display a lack of understanding of the definition of the terms used here and how the technology and markets actually work

b) Responding to things I didn't even say or don't really care about and didn't make any claims regarding

Edited January 8, 2018 by Zeffolia

[goDel]

The hard life of a moderator being moderated?

 

Ok, this was a stupid attempt at being snarky, but what the F is going on here? I feel like I'm reading Kim Jong-Un's secret diary.

[Braintree]

Take all the money you make from Bitcoin and invest in tulips.

[YangYing]

the internet rn is flooded with ads on this shit, whoever the fuck is pouring money to show me it n try to cash in on me fuck u n shove ur rottin crypto bs up ur dick u cunts

 

edit: no ill meant towards zeff just dese ads r doin my head in ffs

Edited January 8, 2018 by MIXL2

[Soloman Tump]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42602038

 

When the crypto-parodies are now billion dollar businesses, you have to wonder when its all going to go POP

[sweepstakes]

the internet rn is flooded with ads on this shit, whoever the fuck is pouring money to show me it n try to cash in on me fuck u n shove ur rottin crypto bs up ur dick u cunts

[batch]

[zlemflolia]

holy shit

[zlemflolia]

Even more shocking in related videos.  

 

[chenGOD]

1) Every single crypto transaction being a taxable event and how unsustainable that is, in comparison to fiat not being a taxable event every single time you do a transaction using it based on the foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations

 

2) Hyper inflation is not inherent in markets.  I don't know what you're even talking about here

 

3) Inflation always equals devaluation by definition.  There is a higher supply of the fiat therefore it is worth less.  And it is true that no value is created out of nothing in hard forks, I already gave you a very detailed explanation of why no value is being created out of nothing with hard forks but I guess you didn't understand it so whatever

 

4) I'm not contradicting anything you're just not understanding the minutiae of the topic at hand here.  I stated exactly what I stated before in different words.  I never said they all are and that's irrelevant.  They are the only currencies capable of guaranteeing their deflationary qualities - no nation state can guarantee it won't inflate its fiat by printing more.

 

5) I don't know what you're responding to but it's not my post.  What imperfect thing am I making the enemy of what good thing?

 

6) I never said it's a technological leap in fact I specifically stated in my post that it's basically analogous to a centralized shitcoin, but it's just an example of something kind of like crypto becoming popular in a developing nation

 

Anyway I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore because you're never staying on topic.  All of these bullet points have diverged from the original topic every time I reply and you're either straw manning me or not discussing the topic at hand.  Maybe some readers will gain something from it but I don't feel like making these long replies to you anymore since you're basically:

a) Not understanding the topic being discussed, and demonstrating that with your refutations which don't even make sense and are just wrong and display a lack of understanding of the definition of the terms used here and how the technology and markets actually work

b) Responding to things I didn't even say or don't really care about and didn't make any claims regarding

 

1) That hasn't explained why it's a bad tax situation - you've just repeated yourself. It's not unsustainable in the slightest. Forex traders pay taxes, a large percentage of which is subject to the fluctuation of value of foreign currency, as capital gains will vary based on the amount of profit you've gained. If you purchase a good or a service with crypto, you are not subject to taxes on that transaction. If you trade one crypto for another you are subject to taxes much like forex traders are (not identical situations, but certainly not completely dissimilar).

 

2) Price differential is inherent in markets, not hyperinflation. You cannot guarantee that hyperinflation will never happen with crypto, because currencies are subject to supply shocks and the value of other currencies just to name two possible external factors on the value of a currency,

 

3) No, inflation does not always equal devaluation - largely due to international trade. If economies were completely closed, then yes - the premise would be correct. However because they are not, inflation does not always equal devaluation.

The premise that a higher supply of money means inflation is also incorrect. Here is an easy explainer: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2011/05/14/money-growth-does-not-cause-inflation/#\

You have not explained how no value is created out of nothing - you simply said that value only exists for hard forks because people choose to give them value. However, people have clearly chosen to give value to forks such as BCH, BTG, and ETC - hence value was created out of nothing (as people got those forked coins simply because they held BTC or ETH at the time of the fork).

 

4) Earlier in the thread you wrote - "fiat holders do not get a boost in their fiat stashes like crypto holders during crypto forks do." This implies that crypto holders get a "boost" in their crypto stashes, and a correspondent boost in fiat. You then wrote, "Crypto holders do not inherent get a boost in the fiat valuations of their crypto stash from hard forks..." These two statements are contradictory.

To be fair, you provide a disclaimer when you wrote that, "...they only do if people think those hard forks are valuable." However, clearly people give value to some of those hard forks, as noted in point 3.

 

5) When you wrote "Fiat currencies are backed by the full force of their respective countries, fair enough - and this is often good enough.  But it's not perfect," - The saying is "don't let perfect be the enemy of good." Which means just because something isn't perfect shouldn't prevent it from being used, if it is good enough. There are certainly problems with fiat, but the system is actually very good. Terrible regulations and policies that allow the wealthy to avoid taxes are certainly problems that stimulate inequality - but crypto won't solve those.

 

6) You provided information that was essentially incorrect, and I corrected it. As a result m-pesa went from "proving that widespread adoption is possible" (widespread adoption of what? payment processors using mobile networks? Japan and South Korea proved that was possible in 2004) to being analogous to a "centralized shitcoin". However, even that description is inaccurate - because it's not a currency. The point may be made that mobile banking is popular in developing nations.

For payment processors using blockchain (and mobile banking, though not exclusively), examples such as Everex and OmiseGo (although pay processing is only one factor in the overall OmiseGo project) can be looked at, particularly because they have working products.

 

a) Never once have I used a straw man argument, my responses are always on topic. However, when you write that I don't understand the topic or how markets work is clearly an attempt to attack the intelligence of the person you are debating. This is fairly obviously an ad hominem argument, and one which I will not respond to beyond identifying it as such.

b) See my response to a), as you repeat yourself.

 

Sorry to all that just see these walls of texts.

[Alcofribas]

Chen is all you need

[zaphod]

 

1) Every single crypto transaction being a taxable event and how unsustainable that is, in comparison to fiat not being a taxable event every single time you do a transaction using it based on the foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations

 

2) Hyper inflation is not inherent in markets.  I don't know what you're even talking about here

 

3) Inflation always equals devaluation by definition.  There is a higher supply of the fiat therefore it is worth less.  And it is true that no value is created out of nothing in hard forks, I already gave you a very detailed explanation of why no value is being created out of nothing with hard forks but I guess you didn't understand it so whatever

 

4) I'm not contradicting anything you're just not understanding the minutiae of the topic at hand here.  I stated exactly what I stated before in different words.  I never said they all are and that's irrelevant.  They are the only currencies capable of guaranteeing their deflationary qualities - no nation state can guarantee it won't inflate its fiat by printing more.

 

5) I don't know what you're responding to but it's not my post.  What imperfect thing am I making the enemy of what good thing?

 

6) I never said it's a technological leap in fact I specifically stated in my post that it's basically analogous to a centralized shitcoin, but it's just an example of something kind of like crypto becoming popular in a developing nation

 

Anyway I am not going to engage in this discussion anymore because you're never staying on topic.  All of these bullet points have diverged from the original topic every time I reply and you're either straw manning me or not discussing the topic at hand.  Maybe some readers will gain something from it but I don't feel like making these long replies to you anymore since you're basically:

a) Not understanding the topic being discussed, and demonstrating that with your refutations which don't even make sense and are just wrong and display a lack of understanding of the definition of the terms used here and how the technology and markets actually work

b) Responding to things I didn't even say or don't really care about and didn't make any claims regarding

 

1) That hasn't explained why it's a bad tax situation - you've just repeated yourself. It's not unsustainable in the slightest. Forex traders pay taxes, a large percentage of which is subject to the fluctuation of value of foreign currency, as capital gains will vary based on the amount of profit you've gained. If you purchase a good or a service with crypto, you are not subject to taxes on that transaction. If you trade one crypto for another you are subject to taxes much like forex traders are (not identical situations, but certainly not completely dissimilar).

 

2) Price differential is inherent in markets, not hyperinflation. You cannot guarantee that hyperinflation will never happen with crypto, because currencies are subject to supply shocks and the value of other currencies just to name two possible external factors on the value of a currency,

 

3) No, inflation does not always equal devaluation - largely due to international trade. If economies were completely closed, then yes - the premise would be correct. However because they are not, inflation does not always equal devaluation.

The premise that a higher supply of money means inflation is also incorrect. Here is an easy explainer: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2011/05/14/money-growth-does-not-cause-inflation/#\

You have not explained how no value is created out of nothing - you simply said that value only exists for hard forks because people choose to give them value. However, people have clearly chosen to give value to forks such as BCH, BTG, and ETC - hence value was created out of nothing (as people got those forked coins simply because they held BTC or ETH at the time of the fork).

 

4) Earlier in the thread you wrote - "fiat holders do not get a boost in their fiat stashes like crypto holders during crypto forks do." This implies that crypto holders get a "boost" in their crypto stashes, and a correspondent boost in fiat. You then wrote, "Crypto holders do not inherent get a boost in the fiat valuations of their crypto stash from hard forks..." These two statements are contradictory.

To be fair, you provide a disclaimer when you wrote that, "...they only do if people think those hard forks are valuable." However, clearly people give value to some of those hard forks, as noted in point 3.

 

5) When you wrote "Fiat currencies are backed by the full force of their respective countries, fair enough - and this is often good enough.  But it's not perfect," - The saying is "don't let perfect be the enemy of good." Which means just because something isn't perfect shouldn't prevent it from being used, if it is good enough. There are certainly problems with fiat, but the system is actually very good. Terrible regulations and policies that allow the wealthy to avoid taxes are certainly problems that stimulate inequality - but crypto won't solve those.

 

6) You provided information that was essentially incorrect, and I corrected it. As a result m-pesa went from "proving that widespread adoption is possible" (widespread adoption of what? payment processors using mobile networks? Japan and South Korea proved that was possible in 2004) to being analogous to a "centralized shitcoin". However, even that description is inaccurate - because it's not a currency. The point may be made that mobile banking is popular in developing nations.

For payment processors using blockchain (and mobile banking, though not exclusively), examples such as Everex and OmiseGo (although pay processing is only one factor in the overall OmiseGo project) can be looked at, particularly because they have working products.

 

a) Never once have I used a straw man argument, my responses are always on topic. However, when you write that I don't understand the topic or how markets work is clearly an attempt to attack the intelligence of the person you are debating. This is fairly obviously an ad hominem argument, and one which I will not respond to beyond identifying it as such.

b) See my response to a), as you repeat yourself.

 

Sorry to all that just see these walls of texts.

 

 

you're completely wrong. if you purchase goods with crypto you are subject to taxes. you're subject to tax on every transaction that involves an exchange. read the tax code the irs has put forth on this subject. 

also most of these are not currencies. crypto in general is a misnomer. bitcoin at best is a store of value with a secondary use as currency, like gold, but it is an extremely ill conceived currency. most coins are merely utility tokens. xrp for example isn't even used by the banks working with ripple. the token itself is valueless. 

i'll also add that blockchain tech is correcting for problems that mostly don't exist. in almost every case with crypto as a currency you end up having to work backwards to introduce regulation to make it customer friendly. and you already have an equally anonymous method of exchanging money (or laundering it) with quick transaction times and no fees: cash

Edited January 9, 2018 by zaphod

[zlemflolia]

You could say the same about email though "It's just as easy to mail documents and everyone's doing it, and you even get a hard copy.  Email is trying to solve problems that don't exist" crypto makes centralized money transfer services obsolete, but I will admit you're right about the consumer protection aspect with chargebacks and damaged products for instance.  But that is just one aspect

[chenGOD]

Apologies, I believed the Cryptocurrency Tax Fairness Act has passed. It is still before Congress. It is however important to note that the IRS has only created guidance, and it is not yet code. So while crypto is treated as property at the moment, that could change very easily.

 

In Canada it’s slightly different, but I won’t bore people with the details there. Anyhow apologies to Zeff on that point.

 

I don’t disagree with a lot of your other points, but I will argue that the percentage of cash being used in money laundering is much less than the percentage of crypto being used in money laundering.

 

Also ripple is getting the shit kicked out of it, deservedly so. The creators of ripple were very explicit in saying the token shouldn’t be seen as an investment. The token does have utility, but it is wildly overvalued (I don’t own any, no shilling here).

[zlemflolia]

The percentage of crypto being used for money laundering is indeed higher than the percentage of cash being used for money laundering.  But out of all money laundering being done in the world, the percentage of it that is being done in cash is significantly larger, by many orders of magnitude, than the percentage of it that is being done in crypto.  

 

All new technologies like this that grant superior freedoms to humanity are initially used for crime, because crimes are the things most restricted in one's freedom to perform them.  It was the same with the internet, people initially said it's just for porn and drugs and weird people.  Now look.  The same thing happened to crypto in the beginning.  This should be no surprise.

[chenGOD]

Yes but since the supply of BTC is fixed and money launderers still prefer BTC over monero or other privacy coins (for the moment), we can hypothesize that the percentage of crypto used for money laundering will remain steady. Law enforcement is seeing an increase in money launderers using crypto (ie moving from cash to crypto), and since privacy coins and decentralized exchanges will continue to grow and develop, the problem will continue to grow.

 

The internet was initially just text pages, and had very little to do with porn (mmm those sweet ASCII tittie pics) or criminality. It was all about academic research and sharing of information/discussion. Even with the advent of the web, criminality played a minor role (porn is not criminal, nor is discussion of drugs). So I personally don’t think that’s a great analogy.

[zlemflolia]

Why can you hypothesize that?  They will clearly move over to privacy coins, and since I would guess they likely have high transaction throughput as opposed to hoarding activity, they do not keep some steady baseline quantity of crypto locked up in cold storage.  Furthermore just because money launderers become richer if they hold crypto accidentally through the act of money laundering does not mean money laundering activities will increase any more than they currently are with cash.  

 

And I never said it was a great analogy, I said it was what people said but were wrong about.

Edited January 10, 2018 by Zeffolia

[chenGOD]

Zaphod: Upon reflection, the IRS will likely not care about small amounts of transactions. So if you don’t report your coffee purchases, you should be ok. I’m not a tax attorney, so obviously this is not legal advice. Consider it, hmmm informed advice?

 

Money launderers are already moving to privacy coins, but BTC is still the dominant choice for them. Who knows how long that will last, but for right now we can hypothesize the amount will remain the same. Money laundering activities in crypto will increase because the people who launder money will move from cash to crypto.

[zlemflolia]

That's simply not true, the BTC transaction fees are likely far too high to tumble anything except massive quantities anymore, since BTC is not even anonymous.  I don't think BTC would be good for money laundering at all for this reason alone

[chenGOD]

That is correct, but you’re not thinking like a criminal.

Criminals are lazy, they will do what keeps working until they get busted, or until something easier to use comes along. Monero is a pain in the ass to use.

 

Criminals don’t care as much about losing big percentages on the Tx because they are, after all, laundering money acquire through illicit means. Traditional launderers will take anywhere from an 8-10% cut. Now, if you’re a criminal, and are offered a way to cut out a middle man (who is a potential liability) for higher fees, would you take it? Almost certainly.

Also, criminals do launder large sums. Hundreds of thousands to millions. The issue with the privacy coins is a lack of liquidity. Let’s look at monero.

The largest exchange by volume is Bithumb. But that’s a korean exchange, very hard to get accounts there unless you’re a Korean. HitBTC and Bitfinex are the next largest. HitBTC the volume is almost all XMR/BTC, so people are going from Monero to BTC, which as you say, is not anonymous. Bitfinex they’re going straight to USD, but Bitfinex will cooperate with US law enforcement (as do other big US based exchanges). So there are few avenues to get your XMR out in any meaningful sums.

 

BTC on the other hand still has many ways to get large amounts of fiat out in other countries.

 

The privacy coins will continue to grow in liquidity and will be a major problem for law enforcement within a year or so, but for now it’s still BTC.

[Zephyr_Nova]

I was hanging with a guy last night who makes a living from bitcoin mining.

 

That's all I got.  Carry on.

[Amen Warrior]

When are we launching the IDMcoin?

[Kennylogg Bubblebath]

When are we launching the IDMcoin?

 

abd broski