EsquireCats said: This seems more like identifying cryptocurrencies as a threat to power.
I think it's mainly about identifying them as not being currencies. The purpose of currency is to provide a relatively stable value and crypto obviously doesn't do that. Crypto is a form of speculative investment. Allowing speculative investments to start blurring the line with currency is a bad idea all around.
This is it right here. The Chinese government may have their motivations both good and bad for their decision noted above, but it's just true that crypto currencies are mostly vehicles for speculation, which makes them inherently unstable and not useful as currencies.
Not to mention that the majority of cryptocurrency transactions are criminal, ransom, drug deals, money laundering, and such. the BBC said 80% last weekend.
No, the sooner this idiocy goes away the better.
How would the BBC know if the transactions are invisible? They could say 80% is spent buying Pokémon Cards and they wouldn’t be less wrong.
They can look at transactions in the public ledger. How can you say they are wrong? I’d be willing to bet that they’ve done more research than you have.
EsquireCats said: This seems more like identifying cryptocurrencies as a threat to power.
I think it's mainly about identifying them as not being currencies. The purpose of currency is to provide a relatively stable value and crypto obviously doesn't do that. Crypto is a form of speculative investment. Allowing speculative investments to start blurring the line with currency is a bad idea all around.
This is it right here. The Chinese government may have their motivations both good and bad for their decision noted above, but it's just true that crypto currencies are mostly vehicles for speculation, which makes them inherently unstable and not useful as currencies.
Not to mention that the majority of cryptocurrency transactions are criminal, ransom, drug deals, money laundering, and such. the BBC said 80% last weekend.
No, the sooner this idiocy goes away the better.
How would the BBC know if the transactions are invisible? They could say 80% is spent buying Pokémon Cards and they wouldn’t be less wrong.
It was a panel discussion with a group of experts on computer data security and computer crime. I think they know more about the subject than you and I put together.
Cryptocurrencies that are structured as speculative stores of value and not as stable facilitators of frictionless public transactions remind me of Gruber’s quote on Twitter:
Twitter's business plan, such that it is, has always been something along the lines of “Get big and popular, then just flip the switch and start making money when we feel like it”. There is no switch.
-- John Gruber, Daring Fireball
“Bitcoin el at, such as they are, have always been akin to in-game currency, used to project virtual wealth and to trade for illicit goods, weapons, power-ups, magic mushrooms, child porn. There is no game.”
If any cryptocurrency ever begins to threaten that status quo, it would be trivial for a government to squash that cryptocurrency, to send its value sinking like the Titanic. One can rail all one likes about how unfair that is, but that's the way the world works. Never bet against the Fed.
Except, not... You can google something along the ines of "Can the government shut down Bitcoin" - https://vaultoro.com/will-the-bitcoin-network-be-shut-down-by-the-government-or-banks/ "The concept of Bitcoin often seems to cause some confusion. People still believe governments can shut down the Bitcoin network. They will never be able to, as long as the internet exists. "
Any serious attempt made by the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down bitcoin inevitably came to naught, with Haun saying, "it would have been akin to saying ‘let’s go prosecute cash.'"
It would be better to view Bitcoin (especially) as a crypto-asset, rather than currency - apart from anything else the transaction time is too slow... but then other cryptoassets/"currencies" attempt to address this problem.
If western governments followed suit, we could eliminate ransomware attacks almost instantly.
Yeah because ransomware didn’t exist until cryptocurrency was invented.
Ransomware attacks have exploded since the cryptocurrency became the ransom payment method of choice for criminals. The amount being paid out per attack has tripled in the last year alone and even those organisations who haven't suffered a successful attack are spending millions on prevention.
Without cryptocurrency, criminals make fewer attacks, demand less money and are far more easily caught.
If any cryptocurrency ever begins to threaten that status quo, it would be trivial for a government to squash that cryptocurrency, to send its value sinking like the Titanic. One can rail all one likes about how unfair that is, but that's the way the world works. Never bet against the Fed.
Except, not... You can google something along the ines of "Can the government shut down Bitcoin" - https://vaultoro.com/will-the-bitcoin-network-be-shut-down-by-the-government-or-banks/ "The concept of Bitcoin often seems to cause some confusion. People still believe governments can shut down the Bitcoin network. They will never be able to, as long as the internet exists. "
Any serious attempt made by the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down bitcoin inevitably came to naught, with Haun saying, "it would have been akin to saying ‘let’s go prosecute cash.'"
It would be better to view Bitcoin (especially) as a crypto-asset, rather than currency - apart from anything else the transaction time is too slow... but then other cryptoassets/"currencies" attempt to address this problem.
Maybe not shut down Bitcoin, but if governments and businesses stop accepting it, stop. recognizing it, and stop the banking system from having anything to do with it, its value will collapse. Cash only works because you can use it, buy things with it, spend it, convert it into other currencies. If that becomes not possible then Bitcoin and the other cryptocurrencies become valueless. Money is only worth something if you can spend it.
If any cryptocurrency ever begins to threaten that status quo, it would be trivial for a government to squash that cryptocurrency, to send its value sinking like the Titanic. One can rail all one likes about how unfair that is, but that's the way the world works. Never bet against the Fed.
Except, not... You can google something along the ines of "Can the government shut down Bitcoin" - https://vaultoro.com/will-the-bitcoin-network-be-shut-down-by-the-government-or-banks/ "The concept of Bitcoin often seems to cause some confusion. People still believe governments can shut down the Bitcoin network. They will never be able to, as long as the internet exists. "
Any serious attempt made by the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down bitcoin inevitably came to naught, with Haun saying, "it would have been akin to saying ‘let’s go prosecute cash.'"
It would be better to view Bitcoin (especially) as a crypto-asset, rather than currency - apart from anything else the transaction time is too slow... but then other cryptoassets/"currencies" attempt to address this problem.
Maybe not shut down Bitcoin, but if governments and businesses stop accepting it, stop. recognizing it, and stop the banking system from having anything to do with it, its value will collapse. Cash only works because you can use it, buy things with it, spend it, convert it into other currencies. If that becomes not possible then Bitcoin and the other cryptocurrencies become valueless. Money is only worth something if you can spend it.
It’s taxed as an asset. Governments are beginning to audit/track and require disclosure on tax returns. We saw this come to light, and surprise some of my crypto-holding friends when it was widely discussed in context of Tesla announcing it would accept bitcoin as payment. When you sell it or spend it, you’ve incurred a tax event that requires reporting of gains (or losses if you’re inclined to use those to offset taxable gains elsewhere in your portfolio of assets like stocks, options, art, antiques, etc).
So governments could impede the viability of crypto by simply levying higher taxes against it. Luxury taxes comes to mind. So those who say governments can’t stop crypto aren’t entirely correct. Always remember the old maxim: Tax what you want less of.
If any cryptocurrency ever begins to threaten that status quo, it would be trivial for a government to squash that cryptocurrency, to send its value sinking like the Titanic. One can rail all one likes about how unfair that is, but that's the way the world works. Never bet against the Fed.
Except, not... You can google something along the ines of "Can the government shut down Bitcoin" - https://vaultoro.com/will-the-bitcoin-network-be-shut-down-by-the-government-or-banks/ "The concept of Bitcoin often seems to cause some confusion. People still believe governments can shut down the Bitcoin network. They will never be able to, as long as the internet exists. "
Any serious attempt made by the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down bitcoin inevitably came to naught, with Haun saying, "it would have been akin to saying ‘let’s go prosecute cash.'"
It would be better to view Bitcoin (especially) as a crypto-asset, rather than currency - apart from anything else the transaction time is too slow... but then other cryptoassets/"currencies" attempt to address this problem.
thanks for proving my point about the religious fervor of crypto cultists... even if you didn't intend to do so.
Comments
Twitter's business plan, such that it is, has always been something along the lines of “Get big and popular, then just flip the switch and start making money when we feel like it”. There is no switch.
-- John Gruber, Daring Fireball
“Bitcoin el at, such as they are, have always been akin to in-game currency, used to project virtual wealth and to trade for illicit goods, weapons, power-ups, magic mushrooms, child porn. There is no game.”
-- Radar
Except, not...
You can google something along the ines of "Can the government shut down Bitcoin" -
https://vaultoro.com/will-the-bitcoin-network-be-shut-down-by-the-government-or-banks/
"The concept of Bitcoin often seems to cause some confusion. People still believe governments can shut down the Bitcoin network. They will never be able to, as long as the internet exists. "
https://www.forbes.com/sites/billybambrough/2019/10/08/the-us-government-tried-to-shut-down-bitcoin/?sh=54eb35fe1966
"Now, it's been revealed federal prosecutor-turned bitcoin and cryptocurrency expert Katie Haun was asked to look into "shutting down" bitcoin by her boss at the U.S. attorney’s office in 2012.
...
Any serious attempt made by the U.S. Department of Justice to shut down bitcoin inevitably came to naught, with Haun saying, "it would have been akin to saying ‘let’s go prosecute cash.'"
https://news.bitcoin.com/sec-commissioner-banning-bitcoin-shutting-down-internet-government-foolish-to-try/
Of course, armageddon would do it...
https://www.coindesk.com/can-bitcoin-destroyed-7-unlikely-paths-irrelevance
It would be better to view Bitcoin (especially) as a crypto-asset, rather than currency - apart from anything else the transaction time is too slow... but then other cryptoassets/"currencies" attempt to address this problem.
Without cryptocurrency, criminals make fewer attacks, demand less money and are far more easily caught.