Bitcoins

Satoshi

Jegersmart wrote: »

Interesting. I find that most of my fiat-based "money" is also 99% virtual and is also dependent on electricity if not also internet.

I also find it interesting that the vast majority view new types of currency with extreme suspicion
J

Satoshi wrote: »

This is the biggest hurdle to get over, its people understanding crypto. Will little old laddies going to do their shopping undertstand units of crypto? I think the answer is no. I have tried explaining crypto to very intelligent adults but they don't get it, and I have to honestly say well I don't undertstand it completely myself even the people who made it do not completely understand it or what may happen to it in the future Or how to measure the value of each unit of all the competing crypto currencies.

But when it comes to little old laddies going shopping working out how many grams of silver something costs, yes they will easily understand that because there is something real its actually something there in their mind, even if its a digital transaction. If all her shopping for the week comes to this many silvergrams, and each item for example milk, eggs, bread costs this many milligrams of silver each, then nobody is afraid of it they can easily grasp it because its something real they can picture in their mind even if its a digital transaction like paying with a credit card today.

I say its very hard for average people to get their head around crypto, how much something is worth valued in units of crypto currency, how can you get your head around that? You can't, there is no historical measuring stick. Silver has several thousand years history being used as money and we know the historical average is 3 silvergrams or a tenth of an ounce valued at an average 12hr days wage.

The only reason little old laddies can understand fiat is before 1971 it was backed by monetary precious metals. Most people do not understand that in 1971 all currencies became unbacked by money.

There is no way little old laddies will understand unbacked crypto unless its backed by something they can understand like grams of monetary precious metal.

grey_gym_sock

Satoshi wrote: »

The only reason little old laddies can understand fiat is before 1971 it was backed by monetary precious metals. Most people do not understand that in 1971 all currencies became unbacked by money.

so how do ppl born since 1971 understand fiat?

i'm sure that many ppl don't knowthat sterling was once backed by gold but no longer is. that doesn't mean they think it still is backed by gold. it means that they neither know nor care what it is backed by. they can use sterling effectively because prices in sterling are reasonably stable. so they can get an idea of what the things they buy ought to cost.

There is no way little old laddies will understand unbacked crypto unless its backed by something they can understand like grams of monetary precious metal.

ladies or laddies? not that it makes any difference ...

most ppl aren't precious metal dealers, and have little idea much grams of precious metals cost. nor would it help them handle money (i.e. sterling) better if they did.

you're living in a fantasy world. precious metals have no necessary connection with money.

you could argue that severing the connection of gold with currency was a bad idea. you can't argue that it hasn't happened. it has.

however, the advantages and disadvantages of gold as currency are of marginal relevance to this thread. which is supposed to be about crypto currencies.

lvader

At least gold has some relevance for central banks for holding as a reserve. Silver is really an industrial metal these days with some speculative investing. Thats not to say they aren't worth investing in, I'm in both, but the talk of them being money as opposed to currency is just silly.

JohnRo

The challenges faced and threat posed to long established beliefs, inertia and ignorance around the whole concept of money shouldn't be under estimated. It is where the really big ideological battle lies for crypto acceptance, beyond any immediate battle against the efforts made by cleptocrats to protect their turf.

The point Satoshi makes about little old ladies does have an element of sobriety to it in so far as people (not just little old ladies) do generally tend to like what they've always known and fear or feel threatened by changes and things they don't know.

Education might help but it isn't a simple task (or subject) and even then some seem to resist, preferring instead to see the status quo as a lesser evil without ever trying to understand what the alternative is actually offering, seeking instead comfort in ridicule and reasons to dismiss it.

The one area where any future crypto will need major development is in immediate and secure systems that provide easy fail safe accessibility for the "average" person who has no interest in how it all works, only in what it does.

I take a view that's something that will have to develop over time in tandem with adoption. It's something paddy made some very good points about several pages back.

Satoshi

lvader wrote: »

At least gold has some relevance for central banks for holding as a reserve. Silver is really an industrial metal these days with some speculative investing. Thats not to say they aren't worth investing in, I'm in both, but the talk of them being money as opposed to currency is just silly.

We will have to disagree on that one, I think both gold and silver are not being used as money at the moment but they both will be again in the future. Just because banks have run out of most of their silver stockpiles but they still have lots of gold left. Silver is more rare in above ground stockpiles it is going to take a long time for the central banks to build back up their silver bullion stockpiles to what they were just a few decades ago.

JohnRo

No one knows what stockpiles or liabilities banks really truly have had, do have or will have. Even the banks themselves given the nature of the convoluted instruments they're tangled up in. They're autonomous and undergo no independent external auditing.. everything just ticks along without a problem, until the next problem.

lvader

Satoshi wrote: »

Just because banks have run out of most of their silver stockpiles but they still have lots of gold left. Silver is more rare in above ground stockpiles it is going to take a long time for the central banks to build back up their silver bullion stockpiles to what they were just a few decades ago.

There are 2 types of silver bugs, the ones that know the truth but are happy to propagate lies in the hope some of it sticks and the ones that believe all this crap.

Banks didn't run out of silver, they made a conscience decision to sell it. The huge stock piles of silver aren't needed any more because it is no longer used as a reserve currency, it's mostly an industrial metal these days. There is no reason for central banks to buy silver, any new stockpiling has been down to private investors, ETF etc.

DJBenson

Anybody know what's upset the market today? Prices have plummeted again to ~$700 - took advantage and bought 12 BTC mind :rotfl:

mmedia

DJBenson wrote: »

Anybody know what's upset the market today? Prices have plummeted again to ~$700 - took advantage and bought 12 BTC mind :rotfl:

Not too sure... But i bought a few.

JohnRo

The adoption time scale for this process is going to be years not days with no guarantees either way as it looks like there is no clear strategy (yet) to deal with the threat btc potentially poses to established money.

This might help explain, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=373463.0;all

It's paradoxical, China is the reason for a great deal of the recent interest and surge in "value" but is now starting to apply the brakes, officially at least.

It's difficult to know what's really driving the exchange prices, there's obviously a lot of fear and a lot of people queuing up to exploit that, as well as those trying to destabilise and discredit btc.

One thing for sure, we're past the ignore and ridicule stage.