|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
30th December 2017, 10:06 PM | #1321 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
|
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
30th December 2017, 10:11 PM | #1322 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11,941
|
|
30th December 2017, 11:52 PM | #1323 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
Doesn't that presuppose that somebody is running the "scheme"? The whole point is that nobody is running bitcoin.
That is exactly the same thing that happens with any commodity like gold, silver, diamonds etc. Admittedly these substances have some industrial or aesthetic value but most of the value comes from pure speculation. Pure RUBBISH! You are just making up your own pet definition of a "ponzi scheme" so that you can call bitcoin a "ponzi scheme". Posters have been doing this for years. BUT |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 12:12 AM | #1324 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 11,941
|
I might invest in this because I wanna get in before it's too late
Welcome to the ICO Token Sale! Thank you for your interest in purchasing AML Tokens. AML Bitcoins are Borderless, Secure, Identity Based Digital Currency. AML Bitcoins Are Compliant With Worldwide Regulations, Including: U.S. Patriot Act, Bank Secrecy Act, Anti-Money Laundering, U.S. Office of Foreign Assets, Control Compliant, Know your Customer, and more. Act Now To Get Discounted Tokens! 300ATK / ETH - BTC + ETH + Altcoin + USD Accepted. You can purchase discounted AML Tokens tokens at the following rates: AML Token ICO Timeline. PRIVATE SALE (COMPLETE) September 2017 AML Tokens Sold: 2,500,000. The NAC team conducted a private sale of AML Tokens during 2017, with 2.5 million tokens sold. The balance of 73.5 million tokens will be available for the public sale phases. PUBLIC SALE PHASE 1 6th October 2017 AML Tokens Available: 13,500,000 @ US$1/token Phase one of the public sale will run from 1st October for early adopters to the AML BitCoin platform. PUBLIC SALE PHASE 2 (NOW OPEN) AML Tokens Available: 20,000,000 @ US$1.25/token Phase two of the public sale will run from the end of the first phase, for those who wish to purchase tokens at a discount. PUBLIC SALE PHASE 3 AML Tokens Available: 40,000,000 @ US$1.50/token The final phase of the token sale will see tokens made available at a discount. Any tokens purchased after this will be at the market rate. |
31st December 2017, 12:23 AM | #1325 |
Philosophile
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
|
I don't think gold, silver and diamonds are merely invested in because they go up forever, but rather because they retain their value well (and yes, because they are aesthically pleasing), because of the properties of the substances themselves.
In other words they are less volatile either in terms of their physical properties (they aren't gases or liquids, or too reactive), and sufficiently rare that they cannnot be easily mass produced or synthesized. Effectively, these substances have a value that can be easily agreed upon. Is this the same for Bitcoin? No. And one reason is that Bitcoin is frankly too weird for general acceptance. And far too volatile. Ultimately it has all of the flaws of any currency or commodity without any of the benefits. I don't think you have to be a doomsayer to point out that Bitcoin will eventually become less volatile when it finds its correct value of practically nothing. |
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin! |
|
31st December 2017, 01:35 AM | #1326 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
No. The fact that no value is created and the winnings are transferred solely from the losers to the winners certainly doesn't presuppose that someone must be "running" the scheme. That is conclusively shown by the example of common pyramid schemes, which, after being started, continue completely decentralized and out of control of anyone in particular, proving that no central authority is required for such a scheme to thrive.
From Wikipedia:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
|
31st December 2017, 02:13 AM | #1327 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 02:24 AM | #1328 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
You can see the aspect of the scheme that other people are referring to, and it is the primary characteristic. There is an inflation of price with no input of real value. In the same way, a bubble inflates in diameter, but no solid mass is entering it. That's why the metaphor is appropriate.
An intentional single malign operator, like Madoff, may well be present, but that isn't necessary for a bubble to form. Which individual directed the tulipomania? None. It was basically a spontaneous movement. So Bitcoin can expand and collapse without being under the direction of an individual operator. |
31st December 2017, 02:26 AM | #1329 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 02:31 AM | #1330 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
|
31st December 2017, 03:24 AM | #1331 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
It was a bubble. The thing speculative bubbles have in common with Ponzi schemes is the essential one, inflation of price without input of real value.
That is a feature of the Bitcoin bubble, as of tulipomania, or essentially of the railway mania, although of course individual swindlers are attracted to these episodes like flies to dung, because they supply the raw material favoured by crooks: greedy idiots with money to spend. |
31st December 2017, 04:43 AM | #1332 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
You claimed that a ponzi scheme didn't need an operator then quoted a source that said that a ponzi scheme has an operator. That makes it VERY relevant.
The highlighted part was so ridiculous that it didn't warrant a response. But just to make it clear, investment is not a zero sum game and there is no such thing a "value" - only demand. |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 04:48 AM | #1333 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
A bubble is not a ponzi scheme otherwise every time the stock market overheats you would have to describe it as suddenly a ponzi scheme.
Read the Wikipedia definition of ponzi scheme as provided by Thabiguy and you won't have to embarrass yourself with your public display of ignorance. |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 04:54 AM | #1334 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Don't be concerned about anything of that kind. The only thing that disturbs me is the thought that you may personally be invested in Bitcoin waiting for it to go up to $100k. If you're not, I am at ease. I know what Ponzi schemes and bubbles are, and I have referred to the important feature they have in common.
|
31st December 2017, 05:56 AM | #1335 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
|
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
31st December 2017, 06:00 AM | #1336 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
No, I didn't. If you look above at what I said, you will find that I claimed, I quote, "The fact that no value is created and the winnings are transferred solely from the losers to the winners certainly doesn't presuppose that someone must be 'running' the scheme."
That is not a statement about a Ponzi scheme specifically - indeed, there's no mention of "Ponzi" at all in that sentence - but instead a statement about any general scheme where no value is created and the winnings are transferred solely from the losers to the winners. And indeed, it is true that a general scheme like that doesn't need an operator, and I even provided a specific example proving that (a common pyramid scheme). Again, no. My quote of the Wikipedia definition was a specific response to your false allegation that PartSkeptic's correct claim ("Where does that profit come from? New buyers. Not from a performing asset. That is a key aspect of a Ponzi scheme.") was rubbish and a made up pet definition. By quoting the Wikipedia definition, I showed that you were wrong in your accusation and that what PartSkeptic said was indeed one of the defining aspects of a Ponzi scheme. I agree that in the specific aspect of having/not having an operator, bitcoin is closer to for example a pyramid scheme than a Ponzi scheme. But that doesn't make you any less wrong about denying that what PartSkeptic said was a key aspect of a Ponzi scheme. What is unclear to me is why you have such a problem with admitting that you were wrong about that. That's not embarrassing; I respect those who can admit that they were wrong about something, because it shows that they are capable of critically reevaluating their own views. What's embarrassing is refusing to admit that you were wrong, when everyone can see that you were. |
31st December 2017, 06:26 AM | #1337 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
I agree that investment is not necessarily a zero-sum game. But speculation (in which the only means of gain is selling the asset at a different price than it was purchased at) is. It's not difficult to prove that mathematically. And when exchange fees are considered, it's actually a negative sum game.
|
31st December 2017, 09:33 AM | #1338 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
What you think is "weird" is subjective, and irrelevant. Bitcoin certainly is volatile.
Quote:
Does anyone actually read this thread? |
31st December 2017, 09:35 AM | #1339 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
|
31st December 2017, 10:06 AM | #1340 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
This trick has been attempted many times through the years. Find a bad word, call bitcoin that bad word and use any similarities - no matter how slight nor how many other forms of investment/speculation share those similarities - and say, Q.E.D.
In this case the bad word is "ponzi scheme" (in spite of your denials). The "logic" is invariably the same: Bitcoin is bad. Ponzi schemes are bad. Therefore bitcoin is a ponzi scheme. Therefore bitcoin is bad. Of course, you have to re-work the definition of a ponzi scheme to make it seem reasonable. A ponzi scheme is where somebody takes money from suckers and keeps it for themself. There may not even be anything that the money is invested in, it's not necessary. They payout some money to early "investors" to keep the scam going a little bit longer but sooner or later the scam must collapse. Since bitcoin itself is nothing like that, people like you focus on "winners and losers" as if that proves something. The key feature of ponzi schemes and other related schemes is FRAUD. That is why bitcoin doesn't fit the description. - Everybody can find out the bitcoin price history. - The risks of entrusting your bitcoins to a third party (exchange) have been well documented. - Anybody hoping to make a quick buck from bitcoin can find out how risky that strategy is. - Nobody can manipulate the supply of bitcoins nor interfere with confirmed transactions. - If a user takes proper security precautions then nobody can steal their bitcoins. In short, your argument was a crock in 2011, it was a crock in every subsequent year that it was raised (as if nobody ever thought of it before) and it is a crock today. |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 10:18 AM | #1341 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
I have seen what happens before when uncritical thinkers read each others' posts. They reinforce their POV to such an extent that they become impervious to all forms of logic.
They end up like this: |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 10:55 AM | #1342 |
Philosophile
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,980
|
It is irrelevant if it is merely my personal opinion. Not if it is one shared by potential users. My suspicion is that the weirdness factor is widely shared.
It's not always easy reading the thread when my eyes roll back after reading "fiat" and "tyrannical government". But I would be interested to know what you mean by "large amounts of wealth". If we assume that Bitcoins themselves are volatile, then the people moving this "large amount of wealth" run the risk of losing far more just from holding on to something that could disintegrate at any minute rather than lose a small percentage due to the fluctuation of normal currencies. Let's say that I have ten Bitcoins. What kind of "wealth" do I possess? |
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin! |
|
31st December 2017, 11:48 AM | #1343 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
31st December 2017, 11:57 AM | #1344 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
31st December 2017, 12:10 PM | #1345 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,415
|
Existing currencies are asset-backed. The Fed has sellable assets, the government has sellable assets to infuse liquidity to the Treasury. If the government or Fed tightened up too much, they can react. If they failed, civil claims over assets could be heard (in theory, since nobody would care much about a long court case amidst the famine and whatnot).
If Bitcoin flops, is there an entity to sue? Is there even an entity that has jurisdiction to hear the case? This is where the tapatalk signature that annoys people used to be |
31st December 2017, 12:53 PM | #1346 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
You don't care about whether psion or anyone else loses money. Furthermore, your baseless opinion as expressed ad nauseam could be harmful if you manage to persuade someone out of investing in bitcoin and it turns out to continue its historic run. The best thing investors can do is to mostly ignore forums like this, and do their own due diligence.
|
31st December 2017, 12:56 PM | #1347 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
I don't believe in any jewish finance conspiracies. That's another of your failed attempts to accuse me of being an anti-semite. I believe that the NWO conspiracy is real, and there are some specific families involved who i've mentioned by name, and for whom there is a lot of historical evidence that they've been involved. As to whether the US government or US customs is or has been tyrannical, I'm sure you are uninterested, that is meant for others to decide.
|
31st December 2017, 12:58 PM | #1348 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
Existing currencies are backed by nothing but fraud and violence. The assets that the Fed has acquired were purchased via fraud, and the sellers were typically rewarded with 100 cents on the dollar where the assets were worth a fraction of that.
The decentralized nature of bitcoin is a feature, not a bug, to people interested in it. Obviously you are not one of those people. |
31st December 2017, 01:06 PM | #1349 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
Well I hope you are suitably diligent. Is this not interesting? If I persuade someone out of investing in Bitcoin and it continues its "historic run," then that person will lose by attending to my advice. But if it collapses, then I will have done a favour to anyone who heeds me. That's because Bitcoin has no value except its future price, which is unknowable, as I have argued.
You can't say to me: if you persuade someone out of investing in Bitcoin they will lose the chance of acquiring an intrinsically valuable asset, like a bond that pays interest, or equity in an enterprise that pays regular dividends. You can't say that, because Bitcoin has no intrinsic value at all. You don't even claim it has. Its attractiveness is how it "runs". Pure speculation. A transparent bubble. A zero sum game of dice throwing. My advice? Stay out of the casino. ETA Bitcoin trading price range today $12,166 to $14,112. |
31st December 2017, 04:27 PM | #1350 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
I suppose I should address this fake concern of yours.
I can assure you that I have not gambled with any money that I can't afford to lose (the first rule of gambling). Even if your worst case scenario happened and bitcoin crashed permanently I will be all right. I am happy to hold on to whatever I have for the long haul just for the fun of it. I have been studying the bitcoin price charts since 2011 and I am fully aware of the short term and long term risks of investing in bitcoin and I know how to avoid getting myself into trouble. So you can now rejoice in my "future financial wellbeing". Actually I am more interested in my XRP holdings. XRP is the fuel for the Ripple network. Since Ripple is tailor made for transferring sums of money around the world and includes automatic currency conversions along the way (actually it transfers IOUs) many big name banks are using it. This gives XRP a little more legitimacy than some of the other crypto currencies around. (Infrequent users pay a fraction of XRP per transaction - frequent users pay much more. This is Ripple's method of preventing DDOS attacks). I acquired some XRP a few years ago but nearly forgot about it because XRP was never worth more than a fraction of a cent. However, since the beginning of 2017, its value has soared as it tracks other crypto currencies and is currently trading at around $2. I could be on my way to another paper fortune. If not, c'est la vie. |
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
31st December 2017, 06:33 PM | #1351 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,038
|
|
31st December 2017, 11:03 PM | #1352 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".
The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition. This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where a fiery "battle" and the defeat of an "enemy" may be more valued than critical thinking or an understanding of both sides of the issue. (This public service announcement has been brought to you by Wikipedia.) Wow. |
31st December 2017, 11:27 PM | #1353 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
In response to Tippit's posts about fiat money I began reading about Money, Commodity Money and Fiat Money in Wikipedia. Then on to South Sea Bubble and Tulip Mania. And finally the Greater Fool theory.
Quote:
|
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
1st January 2018, 12:28 AM | #1354 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
That's fine. One reads about people who are so confident that they invest more than they can really afford, and borrow money or use credit cards to fund their speculation. I think such people will be in trouble when the inevitable bursting of the bubble occurs.
Quote:
|
1st January 2018, 12:35 AM | #1355 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
1st January 2018, 01:03 AM | #1356 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 814
|
|
1st January 2018, 06:13 PM | #1357 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,109
|
Ponzi schemes aren't any worse than all those other ways of making 'free money'. I actually think they are good because they separate fools from wealth that they don't deserve.
Quote:
Bitcoin's Mysterious Creator Appears to be Sitting On a $5.8 Billion Fortune
Quote:
And that's not bad either. Watching libertarians get sucked in is actually quite entertaining! |
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good. |
|
1st January 2018, 06:19 PM | #1358 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: near trees, houses and a lake.
Posts: 3,229
|
|
1st January 2018, 06:48 PM | #1359 |
Skeptical about skeptics
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 20,952
|
|
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975 |
|
1st January 2018, 10:27 PM | #1360 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4,801
|
One should be able to analyze the block chain to see if those first bitcoins are being sold. And when and how fast. What he should do is sell at a rate that will not kill the market. As for being a psychic he just relies on human nature - there are many who are angry at government corruption and incompetence, and their manipulation by the rich. One does not have to be a fool to be parted from one's money. Just prudently invest in a unit trust, and then let rich bankers use high frequency trading to skim billions off what should be normal proper investing - while the government sits by and does not ban the irregular trading. |
__________________
**Agnostic theist. God/Satan/Angels/Demons may not exist - but I choose to think the probability is that they do. By personal experience.** |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|