• 28 Posts
  • 153 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2023

help-circle
  • How has the purchasing power of your USD held up over the last 5 years? Because BTC has done pretty damned well. And your BTC still represents the same portion of supply as it always did. BTC is already more widely used and more stable than most national currencies. Unlike fiat currency, it isn’t designed to lose value over time to inflation of the supply.


  • makeasnek@lemmy.mltoPrivacy@lemmy.ml[QUESTION] Privacy and the digital euro
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Yes absolutely, because any time the government can increase surveillance and control, they will. The Pirate Party is one of the few political forces in the EU fighting hard against this. Central Bank Digital Currencies will be the biggest threat to individual liberty and privacy we see in our lifetimes. In a time of global instability, these threats to our freedoms continue to compound from all over the political spectrum. People are more willing to accept some loss in freedom in the promise it will protect them from the “other side” gaining too much power or from worsening economic or other environmental conditions.

    Bitcoin is a solution for those who want privacy, money, and autonomy to work hand in hand. Bitcoin offers much more robust privacy than a bank account and the degree of privacy it offers continues to improve. It’s not controlled by a central bank, entity, or board of directors who can mess with the supply or have any kind of special access to your financial information. You don’t need six forms of ID to use it, in fact, you don’t even need one! It’s truly autonomous money that separates the role of the state from the role of money.

    With Bitcoin, I can send money to anybody anywhere on planet earth with a cell phone and a halfway reliable internet connection in under a second for pennies in fees (using Bitcoin lightning). And I can send that money to anybody even if they have an unstable banking system, no banking system at all (billions of people), or their banking system excludes them due to their gender, sexuality, or status as a political dissident. Venmo can’t do that, Paypal can’t do that, my bank can’t do that, Taler can’t do that. It has a clear fiscal policy of a 21 million coin cap. It has faced attacks and attempted bans from nation states and world powers, yet it has reliably performed this function of sending money around for 15 years without a single hour of downtime, without a single hack, without a single bank holiday or failure or any kind. It has a market cap bigger than Sweden’s GDP. It is more widely adopted than most national currencies. It can’t be controlled, debased, or inflated by any corrupt central bank. It actually has use and value. You may not use it, but that doesn’t mean other people don’t get immense use out of it.

    Monero is king when it comes to privacy coins though. So from a privacy perspective, that’s worth looking into as well. Long-term I think Bitcoin will eat Monero for lunch since it can easily adopt the privacy technologies Monero has and the Bitcoin community is very pro privacy. Monero also lacks an L2 like lightning which means transactions are slower and more expensive and eventually fees will get ridiculous if adoption reaches parity with Bitcoin. Depending on your use case, that may or may not matter.


  • Nobody in this community cares about opening a tab on Lightning and needing to continually police it to make sure you don’t lose your coins

    You don’t have to do this. This is all automated and abstracted away in UX. I’ve never manually looked at any channels. There is also zero incentive for an attacker to do an attack as your describing because prevention of such attacks is automated and they have to put coins at risk to do it. In lightning’s early days what you’re talking about was real and true, but it’s been years since that’s been the case. I dismissed lightning out of hand as well and came back round to it recently and it’s really matured a lot.

    Other algorithms are designed to use a large amount of memory also, and memory is harder to scale than computing power.

    Ultimately you are replacing one type of scale with another. At the end of the day, it’s hardware, and people will buy the appropriate hardware to mine, and if you can achieve economies of scale you can mine more efficiently all other variables the same. What route they use to turn that energy into BTC is almost immaterial.

    Other algorithms enforce that multiple nodes need to work in concert, and the network delays between them also enforce an additional cost.

    Until a device is created that can do it without concert, then you’ve ended up at square one except worse because one actor can now gain a significant advantage much more than say the party who gets the new ASICs first. You can “prove work”, you can’t “prove network latency”. Basing anything on network delays will cause clustering and centralization and is a less equitable distribution of mining power than energy can provide.

    but can severely restrict where mining can happen if they think it is burning too much power and endangering other parts of the economy.

    I’m not sure they want to though. Bitcoin miners are ‘buyers of last resort’, they’re not buying power at peak demand times. They’re not competing with existing electricity buyers. They’re helping grids over-provision renewables and ensuring they’ll have a buyer for any extra power produced during non-peak time and driving down the electric rates for their normal ratepayers since your rate is essentially cost to produce electricity/units of electricity produced and as you scale and bring in more renewables cost per unit goes down. Regulators have taken both pro and anti-mining stances, we’ll see how it shakes out, but regardless, as you say, it’s math and mining will still happen regardless. My money is on the grids which have 100% of produced electricity bought 100% of the time at the most efficient scale possible.


  • That’s a “real primary”. A democratic process doesn’t mean you’ll like all the options, just that anybody is welcome to participate and become an option if they want and you can vote for them if you want. Few people ran because there was no reason to run, they already had a very strong candidate. But if they’d won the primary vote, they would have replaced Biden. I don’t say my city elections aren’t “real elections” because only one or two people run for a position, that’s just who showed up, it’s as real an election as any other.

    If you are knowledgeable about how US elections work, you know that if you vote for somebody in the primary and they win the general, they will probably be the primary winner/default pick for the next cycle too since it gives them an advantage. If they fuck up badly enough, somebody else can beat them in the next primary, it’s happened before.


  • Nobody transacts with it anymore, because it is a StOrE oF vAlUe.

    I transact with it daily. Other people do to especially in the developing world, there is constant competition for blockspace, those people aren’t just sending transactions between their own wallets. Its price has little to do with value as a transactional currency. I think you are conflating price with transaction fees, which lightning has solved. You can use a single on-chain transaction ($1.50) to open a lightning channel which can have over a billion transactions in it for less than a penny in fees each. Lightning transactions take under a second. You can use that lightning channel to transact with anybody else on lightning. All while being secured by main chain. It’s powerful stuff and it’s not even the only L2 in existence for Bitcoin.

    BTC’s PoW algorithm simply doesn’t scale

    It absolutely scales. It has scaled till now and will continue to do so. There are plenty of valid criticisms of PoW, this one isn’t one of them. The energy is used to secure the network, it decides who can update blocks, that is literally the point. You can say that ‘proof of ownership/stake’ are ‘secure enough’ but there is no argument they are more secure. It’s literally “who owns the coins controls the network” and once you get enough coins to 51% attack, you can 51% attack the network forever at no additional cost. It also causes increased centralization of wealth. Proof-of-work requires you to keep pouring money/resources/energy into your attack and when you can’t do that any more, your attack essentially gets rolled back. Energy is the most equitably (but not perfectly equitably) distributed resource on earth.




  • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOPtopolitics @lemmy.worldGaetz unveils bill allowing bitcoin tax payments
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    It enables me to send money to anybody anywhere on planet earth with a cell phone and a halfway reliable internet connection in under a second for pennies in fees. And I can send that money to anybody even if they have an unstable banking system, no banking system at all (billions of people), or their banking system excludes them due to their gender, sexuality, or status as a political dissident. Venmo can’t do that, Paypal can’t do that, my bank can’t do that. It has a clear fiscal policy of a 21 million coin cap. It has faced attacks and attempted bans from nation states and world powers, yet it has reliably performed this function of sending money around for 15 years without a single hour of downtime, without a single hack, without a single bank holiday or failure or any kind. It has a market cap bigger than Sweden’s GDP. It is more widely adopted than most national currencies. It can’t be controlled, debased, or inflated by any corrupt central bank. It actually has use and value. You may not use it, but that doesn’t mean other people don’t get immense use out of it.

    And it does this with <1% of global electricity usage, almost entirely from renewables since miners chase the cheapest electricity which comes from renewables and times of non-peak demand. Moving money around costs energy no matter how you do it. For a network that moves trillions of dollars every year, that’s a pretty small amount of energy to do it with.





  • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOPtopolitics @lemmy.worldGaetz unveils bill allowing bitcoin tax payments
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    My point is that the US dollar fluctuates in value as well. It loses purchasing power, by design, because it’s an inflationary currency. Which means it loses value over time. BTC might go up, it might go down, but it’s not literally designed to lose value. 2-3% per year is Fed policy goal in “good years”, our recent inflation has been bad because it’s beyond that.

    The US govt can swap BTC for USD or other currencies instantly if they want to.


  • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOPtopolitics @lemmy.worldGaetz unveils bill allowing bitcoin tax payments
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    They can easily do that. Bitcoin payments process in under a second for < 1% fee (Lightning) or 10 minutes for roughly $1-$2 in fees (main chain), selling on an exchange is instant. The federal government has also held onto some BTC long-term from criminal cases, that ended up being a pretty good investment decision for them. They hold onto lots of currencies.

    In any other Bitcoin payment situation, you are credited the value of the BTC at the time you send it. What the receiver of that BTC does with it later or how its value changes is not your problem. Same with any other currency. The IRS isn’t coming after you for an additional 20% from your last return just because a US dollar buys 20% less bread than it did when you made your payment last tax year.









  • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOPtopolitics @lemmy.worldGaetz unveils bill allowing bitcoin tax payments
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Ok. I call bullshit on this. Funds do not hold crypto unless they explicitly say they do, like some of these crypto ETFs that have started up.

    It’s more common than you think. Here’s an article about the Wisconsin state pension fund investing in Bitcoin. You can pay taxes in Colorado with it and use it at the DMV. Pretty much every major bank has some exposure to it either by owning BTC outright or investing in adjacent technology. A little googling will find you plenty of more examples. And you are right, now that ETFs exist, we will see even easier institutional adoption.

    The regulatory landscape is so weird for crypto right now that we don’t even know if they are handled as a security or not.

    SEC has been incredibly clear that Bitcoin is not a security. The rest of them though, that’s where they are murky on their language.

    How else would they get their foreign bribe money?

    They don’t need Bitcoin for that, they can just legally accept those bribes in most cases or move around some money some other way while knowing there is a near zero chance they will ever get prosecuted for it. Ask Kushner how he does it.