The Intergalactic Case for BTC...

Posted by CaptainKirk 3 weeks, 3 days ago to Economics
49 comments | Share | Flag

Again, I know that most of the Gulch don't believe in BTC as a form of Money.
And, personally, the fees are too high to use it as Currency (daily, and small transactions).

But, let's imagine we are invited into an intergalactic environment, with many different planets involved.
Also assume that Gold is super common on many of these planets, as are diamonds, but on some others there is none.

Since they are more advanced... They handled this by creating a form of Money on the BlockChain.
With something they call "Credits". And it turns out, you basically find an on-ramp by selling some of your "assets"
for some of these "Credits". And they are digitally held, just like BTC. But there is a KNOWN Limited supply, so
there is no counterfeiting. Used for a Century in these advanced cultures.

Everyone generally accepts Credits, and Everyone is also willing to barter.

The point is that BTC is the closest thing to a FAIR form of Money that could span a galaxy.
In fact, because of the differences in resources among Planets... It MIGHT start to make more sense.

Everyone thinks Gold, Silver. We know FIAT CASH is trash. The government counterfeits it, and calls it inflation.
It will have ZERO value in the future.

While Gold and Silver will always have some value. Imagine the nightmare of operating with a Species where Gold is as prevalent as LEAD for us. Gold would lose its lustre.

But you will NEVER run into a Species that basically "Prints Credits" for free (like our Federal Reserve does, and those
Magic Computers in the government have been doing).

JUST a thought exercise. Again, BTC is, to me, a very fair way to transaction.
Especially because it cannot be controlled.
And while it requires Electricity and the Internet... Any dealing with space aliens that does not involve electricity is simply a take over move anyways...

Curious if this puts a different perspective on it for anyone.

The Video is 5m long, and it started my thought process...



All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    But BTC does not require more people buying in.
    Michael Saylor is HOLDING thousands of BTC.

    In a Ponzi schema. Someone like MADOFF is selling you a POSITION in his scheme (Giving you PAPER or a STATEMENT that ONLY HE can let you cash out of). When someone exits, HE (centralized), must pay that from the monies collected from new people.

    When I exit a stock, I have to find a willing buyer.
    When I exit BTC, I just have to find a willing buyer.

    Versus a Bank, that TURNS a LOAN (Debt) into an ASSET, and borrows from it (Making money out of THIN AIR).

    I don't see this. BTC is as much a Ponzi Scheme as buying AMZN stock.

    Now, MSTR, borrowing money, to buy BTC. (if they use leverage and borrow against the loans value, or the inflated stock value, to buy BTC, then I would agree it looks like a Ponzi. But they have CONTROL).

    BTC, by legal definition is considered real-estate.
    And yes, MANY people have bought real-estate and sold it for less, or given it away.

    So, explain how a form of Real-Estate is a ponzi scheme.
    And how the total amount of this real-estate is limited... That makes it possible to sell it to everyone (but only by paying for it with the previous purchases into the system, which doesn't happen, because those are held by individuals).

    I appreciate your sharpening my arguments.
    But I think you are slowly losing the ponzi scheme argument.

    (Doge Coin, Shiba Coin ... Yeah, unlimited numbers can be printed at any time).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    Why barter with physical goods? Why not trade with tokens that represent exact physical good ownership redeemable on demand?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    Because fiat was inflated.
    It's the SAME process that makes STOCKS go up.
    And Real-Estate, and house values.

    I paid $x and now it's worth > $2x
    That's profit. Trust me, I MUST PAY TAXES on those gains.

    is that not the definition of making money?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    Once you get rid of statism, federal reserve will go away. Your problem is not lack of BTC, your problem is taxation (and other state-related factors) creating demand for feat and making it the dominant currency. Once you remove statist violence and fraud from society, free market will take over and the best system will win. If it is BTC then so be it (although, I strongly suspect it is not). For now, the state can easily (and does easily) outlaw anything that threatens its existence. So, BTC is easily defeated.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    The only "better" in economic sense is "cheaper" or "more productive".

    You can't get rich if the cost of production for an item is the same as what you are able to sell it for. You need some profit margin. In an environment where you have a lot of alterntives and direct and indirect competitors, that is exactly what you are going to get - almost no profit margin. You must make something cheaper to produce in order to have a profit margin.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    "A Ponzi scheme is a type of investment fraud where returns are paid to earlier investors using the capital from newer investors"

    "typically collapses when it becomes difficult to recruit new participants"

    A ponzi scheme has nothing to do with printing currency out of thin air.

    With BTC, you have some people (not miners) 'investing' in it with the idea that somebody else will buy it from them for a higher price. Eventually, you run out of willing buyers. Now, BTC is different from a ponzi somewhat, because it has some usefulness other than just going up in price with increasing demand. For example, you can use it to avoid bank restrictions and government controls. So, technically speaking, once everyone on earth is using BTC, it doesn't necessarily have to collapse, provided that it continues to be useful to its holders. However, nothing lasts forever. Eventually, something better will emerge, BTC will no longer be as useful and will go to near zero. All who hold BTC at that time will lose their capital. So, BTC is a money time machine in a way. It transfers wealth from the future to the past.

    I guess you could argue that a lot of other assets work like this, such as stocks, and I would agree, except for stocks that pay dividends. If a stock doesn't pay dividends, it is trash. Other assets like real estate have earning potential as well. Gold doesn't, unfortunately, however, it will be long before gold becomes cheap to synthesize from lead or something. I don't even recommend holding too much gold. Only use it as cash, once a big enough pile accumulates, buy income producing assets.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    It's ONLY a ponzi if it were, like the Federal Reserve, able to create BTC out of thin air. Forever.

    This cannot be that. This is a limited resource, backed by a NETWORK of miners who have something to protect (Their own investments in that network).

    Yes you could create your own coin, as a CLONE of this software tomorrow. Good luck building the same type of network... The network was built by people who THREW ASSETS at the networks problems, in order to MINE BTC as rewards for their efforts.

    THAT is why it's not a ponzi scheme.

    Fractional Reserve Banking. With no real limits on levers (Citi was at 42:1 in 2007/8). THAT'S a ponzi scheme.
    And designed around it was FDIC to cleanup the failures at TAXPAYERS Expense.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    "You don't get rich by solving a problem. You get rich by coming up with a solution that is cheaper to deploy than the alternative, thereby receiving a large profit from the extra margin in the price of solutions."

    What's cheaper than letting the FEDERAL RESERVE Manage our currency?

    Everything, when you consider the inflation.
    The corruption/stealing.

    remember, if governments were forced to use BTC. We could trace EVERY SATOSHI.
    There would be no "$3T Missing, sorry, not sure what happened to it".

    This is why it was really created. For accountability. But the libertarians realized...
    Oh, if this works, it can actually FREE us from using "Sponsored Terror Networks (banks)" to move money and control interest rates.

    Actually, Eli Whitney, I believe created the concept of interchangeable parts (the cotton gin guy). Which is the precursor to assembly lines.

    I disagree, if you build a better way to do something, and MILLIONS and MILLIONS of people use it. That's usually how people get rich.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    again, I didn't buy BTC in the "hopes" of getting rich off of it. I bought the idea of dematerializing money.

    Remember Xerox? Photo-Mat?

    What they do was replaced by technology.
    Now, I did consider part of my BTC price a TEST of the system. It's ROUGH and UGLY. Too easy lose your keys. It's not for the faint of heart. But it's getting there.

    JPM called it a Ponzi scheme. BTC is EARNED from doing work. MINING Digital Blocks using cryptography. DropBox makes money charging you to store your files, and move/share them.
    I see no difference.

    BTC is an ASSET CLASS. Saylor calls it digital real-estate.

    Most of your complaints will go away when everyone has some. The price will stabilize. People will use Satoshis to buy things.

    We are just in the early stages.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    agreed. But imagine barter when you actually have to barter the barter item, then transfer it physically.
    The time, energy, etc.

    My point being. Once Communications move digitally (usually always faster than physical movement). The nature of the problem is basically solved. And we will create side-chains and other processes to handle this.

    Or Guido from Galaxian Prime pays you a visit. LOL
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    "I also bought gold a long time ago. It doesn't do anything."

    Exactly what money should do - nothing. Money should have the same value as time ticks. Unit of account changing all the time creates inefficiencies. For example, people have to keep chaing their prices. This is very inconvenient.

    There is no free lunch. You can't expect money to sit there and make you more money. That's a dumb shit idea right there. Your fellow men must work to produce stuff to give you (for money), but you just sit there (on a constantly growing pile of money) and consume and give nothing in return. Fuck that noise.

    Now, you can invest money and get it to return more than what you put in (by increasing system productivity), but that is a very difficult and risky activity. You might actually lose your money if you fail, or maybe get the same amount back as you put in.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    You don't get rich by solving a problem. You get rich by coming up with a solution that is cheaper to deploy than the alternative, thereby receiving a large profit from the extra margin in the price of solutions.

    I believe Ford's thing was the assembly line (which increased worker productivity and lowered worker skill requirements).

    Google decreased time required of people to find things on the Internet (again, productivity increase). The ads was just a way to monetize it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    I believe we have a different definition of the word 'investment'.

    Buying BTC at early stages is basically the same thing as getting into a ponzi scheme early, you get to cash out for lots of profit before the whole thing crashes. This isn't investment. Investment would be buying or paying for development of a tool to increase worker productivity.

    I wouldn't say BTC is fully a ponzi scheme, only partially a ponzi scheme.

    So, if I was to invest into BTC, I would NOT buy BTC. I would purchase stock of a company in the BTC ecosystem or provide private equity.

    You guys BTC proponents have a warped understanding of reality.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks ago in reply to this comment.
    FTL doesn't mean instantaneous travel, just faster than light. Light is pretty slow, so even if you go 10x faster than light, that's still a crawl at a galactic scale.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks, 1 day ago in reply to this comment.
    Well, the assumption being that FTL travel would bring FTL communications. Otherwise the double spend issue is huge. Continuing, if already used by multiple species/planets in the galaxy, I assume that minor point was solved.

    Finally, QUIT attacking the early investors in the technology. Wow, seems emotional.

    Meanwhile, you are okay with Banksters (BIS,FED) being "above the law, and unaudited", so that they can PRINT as much as they want.

    You do know that the company that provides the INK and printing technology to print MANY Countries PAPER... Only accepts GOLD as payment. I wonder why?

    It's okay that FORD got rich making cars.
    But people getting rich for solving a HUGE problem (trust-free digital transactions). NOT GOOD.

    It's okay that Google got rich making DIGITAL SEARCH and DIGITAL Ads. But OMG...

    It's okay that Amazon got rich DIGITIZING a storefront and perfecting delivery, driving costs down.

    But someone creating a Libertarian form of money, that nobody is forced to use... If those investors got rich, it's unfair.

    The question is always. Has it changed things? Will it change the world? Will BILLIONS of people use it? Will MILLIONS develop some level of freedom from the BANKS because of this?

    Yeah... But let's not reward the original thinkers. Keep in mind, that guy who BOUGHT BTC years ago (like me), gave up REAL MONEY for something MANY said was FAKE and USELESS.
    So, yes, some of this is a RISK/REWARD play.

    Back when it was at 20K, I told people to buy SOME. Because the odds it goes to ZERO is far less than the odds it goes to 100K and that's a huge return... I know some listened. Nobody has to buy a whole one.

    I also bought gold a long time ago. It doesn't do anything. But it hedged the inflation for me. But it PRODUCES NOTHING. Why should I be rewarded?

    Secondary Note: Side-Ledgers are already a thing. So, the double spend won't happen, the transaction will go through "AmEx" so the vendor pays a small fee, the seller pays a small fee, the transaction is complete. And AmEx honors the transaction at the Galactic Level. Maybe "GalEx"
    Don't leave your home planet without it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by nonconformist 3 weeks, 1 day ago
    "The point is that BTC is the closest thing to a FAIR form of Money that could span a galaxy."

    That's the farthest thing from the truth that I have ever heard.

    How is it fair when some idiot wastes his money on ownership of a dubious Internet token, forgets about it, then after a few years finds out he is a billionaire, 1000xing his money? He produced NOTHING. It is highly unfair to someone else who invested the same amount of money into something actually productive yet only doubled his money.

    Also, it can't span a galaxy because, at those distances, double spend will become a major problem. I believe even at Mars-distance double spend is a problem. There is 1 block every 10 minutes on average. Communication delay to Mars is 13 minutes on average. You can't have miners on Mars because they will constantly fork the blockchain.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 weeks, 3 days ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, we have a magnetic field. And moving a GIANT piece of IRON through such a field at a high speed, will produce EDDY Currents and certainly can produce an EMP. Especially if the meteor explodes giving it a SUDDEN change in velocity.

    Thats just my opinion on how it could happen.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mhubb 3 weeks, 3 days ago
    no
    BTIC IS NOT money
    it may be a type of exchange

    but as the Earth's Magnetic Field is weakening due to the coming Pole Shift, you damn well better protect your BTC from the Sun's Fury

    me, i plan to build a Miner for some type of thing, just not a priority

    i leant that a major impact could generate an EMP from the force it transfers to the surrounding environment, that was news to me.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo