Cryto currency and mining

Sheeps

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i can exchange dollars for euro in 5 minutes. can i do that with a bitcoin?

With Ripple, you can do it in 6 seconds.

ohnonotgmail

srsly78 wrote: »

Yes works the same way. Gotta shop around to get best exchange rates. If you want instant exchange there are bitcoin atm machines but that won't give a good rate - similar to the ****ty fx places in airport.

but i couldnt do that in ireland. those bitcoin atms dont exist here. or anywhere in europe apart from kosovo. and i did a quick check of the fees. they make the ****tiest airport fx place seem reasonable.

ohnonotgmail

Sheeps wrote: »

With Ripple, you can do it in 6 seconds.

exchange bitcoins for cash?

Sheeps

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

exchange bitcoins for cash?

In essence yes. For example if you want to exchange or transfer JPY for VND you can use ripple as an intermediary almost instantly. It's in-fact it's main use-case, which is why it's being used as a vehicle for instantaneous (almost free) international payments (replacing SWIFT based systems).

alb

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

I studied Economics. I work in finance. I consider myself to be fairly tech-savvy.

But I still feel like an idiot because I just can't my head around the whole idea of mining and how it works or creates currency

Edit: Emphasis on the "creates currency" part. I've seen mining explained in simple terms, and while I don't get the intricacies, I get the broad summary of it. But I just don't understand how that's rewarded with currency. Surely that mean's there's some program out there that generates currency to give to people who are mining? And someone owns that program or created it? And surely that means there's an infinite supply?

While sheeps has gone quite technical and perhaps lost you with some of the terminology, lets try a simpler analogy. You could say that it doesn't matter how many goals a team scores in a match, because the score keeper could just add on false goals to the score. So why are we not worried about? well there are witnesses at the match, and there is a video recording that could be used as evidence to verify the score was correct.

In Bitcoin the blockchain, meaning the whole history of every transaction, is public, so anyone can verify it. The transactions allow miners to award themselves new coins are part of this so they can also be verified as fair and within the rules of bitcoin. There is no owner or anyone in control. The system is open and the software is free, anyone can run it and become part of the network or become a miner.

blockchain.info are one website participating in the network, they have a website allowing you to browse their copy of the blockchain.
Here is block 481736 And from that block, here is the transaction where the miner awarded themselves the block reward + fees from the transactions in the block (totaling 15.04btc)

Here's the same block and the same transaction from the copy of the blockchain that a different webside blockexplorer.com has.

You could run the bitcoin software yourself and verify that you get the same block and same transaction too.

What bitcoin does is provide a way for everyone running the software to reach consensus on what the transaction history of bitcoin is without anyone being in charge or in control of it.
It also makes it basically impossible to change old blocks, re-write history or undo transactions.

Austria!

paleoperson wrote: »

I don't care what anyone says, they're a pyramid scheme. No lengthy explanations will change that. You're creating nothing of any value and nothing of worth

So what you think of VISA taking a cut of transactions? Or of banks changing you for having accounts and useing financial instruments? If blockchains can do that more efficiently and cheaper then there's the value.

What about keeping track of information in a decentralised trustless and more efficient manner? What about FACTOM for instance?

Why do you think so many multinational companies have signed up to the EEA? Are they all falling for a pyramid scheme too?

alb

I'll add that if you think using a digital ledger as money is crazy then also realise that that is all your bank account is.

When you opened the account you started at 0, there was a transaction recorded with your first deposit and that gave you a positive balance etc.. the history of transactions is all that is required to arrive at your current balance, and it's just a number in a computer.

There is no segregated pile of euros in a safe representing the money in your account. Your account balance is effectively an IOU from the bank for that amount, with the government saying that if the bank goes bust you have an IOU from the government for up to 100k of your balance.

Think about the question, what is more valuable, a euro coin in your pocket or a euro in your digital bank account? why?

Dohnjoe

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

I studied Economics. I work in finance. I consider myself to be fairly tech-savvy.

But I still feel like an idiot because I just can't my head around the whole idea of mining and how it works or creates currency

Edit: Emphasis on the "creates currency" part. I've seen mining explained in simple terms, and while I don't get the intricacies, I get the broad summary of it. But I just don't understand how that's rewarded with currency. Surely that mean's there's some program out there that generates currency to give to people who are mining? And someone owns that program or created it? And surely that means there's an infinite supply?

Yeah I'm not too good with the tech part, and I'll probably butcher this horribly, but..

Think of it like a mini lottery programmed to make a few coins available every few minutes to those that enter. In order to enter the lottery you have to start your PC solving the problem (mining). So your PC becomes like having a lottery ticket. The more PC's you have (mining power) the more tickets you have, the higher chance of "winning" every few minutes

Your reward will be a few coins

All this is recorded on a public ledger and the coins go to your address on that public ledger. Everyone can see it, but only you can access it with a private key (password)

All of this is "group-validated" by other machines to avoid cheating or duplication

The smart programme that you were solving for the coins will have a raft of features built in, e.g. a limited number of coins that will ever be produced, difficulty of mining increasing over time, etc

You can e.g. transfer the coins from your address to another address (of a shop) to pay for something

All of which is recorded and validated on the central ledger

CruelCoin

Wanderer78 wrote: »

there are actually alternative ideas and systems out there that might just be a little more stable but im sure these alternatives do and would have their own faults and problems.

A key one being anyone living under such a system not being able to afford anything better than a Lada.

The current form of currency and economic structure we have puts into the hands of the average industrial worker: foreign trips, 2 cars, tvs in every room, fag and booze money aplenty.

There is no other system, conceived or attempted that can achieve that level of prosperity.

Are there issues? Absolutely, but at the end of the day, unlike lefty nations, people don't starve to death in capitalistic countries.

Wanderer78

JaMarcusHustle wrote:

Edit: Emphasis on the "creates currency" part. I've seen mining explained in simple terms, and while I don't get the intricacies, I get the broad summary of it. But I just don't understand how that's rewarded with currency. Surely that mean's there's some program out there that generates currency to give to people who are mining? And someone owns that program or created it? And surely that means there's an infinite supply?

I believe it is common that money and it's creation is rarely explained in economics courses, is this true?

astrofool

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I believe it is common that money and it's creation is rarely explained in economics courses, is this true?

That's pretty much Secondary School economics, page 1.

Geuze

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I believe it is common that money and it's creation is rarely explained in economics courses, is this true?

No.

It's in all standard textbooks.

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

I believe it is common that money and it's creation is rarely explained in economics courses, is this true?

I'm an economics graduate and the answer to this question is no.

I can't help thinking a lot of the hype around bitcoin is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of money.

Bitcoin supporters appear to attach great importance to the idea that fiat currency isn't REAL money, that money is just 'created' by governments etc etc.

All true but what makes fiat money actual money is precisely the fact that it is created, supported and backed by governments. It's nothing to do with scarcity, security, transparency and all the other arguments for bitcoin. It's one thing and one thing alone - the relevant government enforces the use of it as a medium of exchange and accepts it as a medium of exchange. There's a clue in the name after all.

Bitcoin is very clever but I still don't understand the mechanism by which it becomes a real currency rather than a bubbly investment. And if it never becomes a currency, what is it actually for?

I get that libertarians who don't believe in governments are excited about it but other than that I must admit I find it mystifying and I've never heard a decent explanation for why it will maintain its value.

alb

Deleted User wrote: »

Bitcoin is very clever but I still don't understand the mechanism by which it becomes a real currency rather than a bubbly investment. And if it never becomes a currency, what is it actually for?

Depends what you mean by 'real currency'. If you mean national currency replacing dollars and euros then I agree that I don't think that is going to happen, things will be pretty crazy if it ever even comes close to happening.

People are trying to classify bitcoin as currency or commodity or paypal alternative etc but cryptocurrency is a new classification all of its own that doesn't fit neatly into any of the old boxes.

Bitcoin is seeing adoption in a few different fronts simultaneously. Firstly it's eating into the market of precious metals use as money. Some people interested in decentralised money as a store of value are choosing bitcoin over gold. There's still way more room for this to grow as the estimated value of gold above ground used as money (i.e. not including industrial use) is $3.5 trillion. This can be anyone from zerohedge libertarian nutjobs to silicon valley nerds to institutional investors looking to have some small exposure to something outside the traditional system.

Bitcoin is also being used as a payment system online, but mostly only by those being refused access to the traditional alternatives.

Crytpocurrencies are seeing a lot of adoption as a trading instrument, it trades on globally accessible markets 24/7 365. If you already have bitcoin you can be up and running on an exchange very quickly. People trade either as a profession, as a serious hobby or as gambling.

Bitcoin isn't finished, it's still a work in progress, the more it grows and the longer it hangs around the better it will get and there are a lot of potential uses beyond money, but first and for now it's mainly 'digital gold'.

ArchXStanton

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

So it seems all the cool kids are investing in bitcoins and mining for etherium these days.
Maybe I'm just getting old and not with it any more but I don't really understand how they work, to me they appear to be pyramid schemes infused with some modern day tulip mania.

The future is now old man...

alb

This digital "newspaper/mail/commerce/photography/music/video/books/video streaming/money" will never take off.

Wanderer78

CruelCoin wrote: »

A key one being anyone living under such a system not being able to afford anything better than a Lada.

The current form of currency and economic structure we have puts into the hands of the average industrial worker: foreign trips, 2 cars, tvs in every room, fag and booze money aplenty.

There is no other system, conceived or attempted that can achieve that level of prosperity.

Are there issues? Absolutely, but at the end of the day, unlike lefty nations, people don't starve to death in capitalistic countries.

more boring regularly trotted out crap, yes yes those lefties and their socialist/communist ways:rolleyes: BORING!

the alternatives i speak of are actually in operation in capitalist countries such as america and germany, one of my favourite being 'public banking'

dont forget, the majority of the 'money' supply, is in fact in the form of debt!;)

the highlighted statement is an interesting one, care to back it up!

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm an economics graduate and the answer to this question is no.

I can't help thinking a lot of the hype around bitcoin is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of money.

Bitcoin supporters appear to attach great importance to the idea that fiat currency isn't REAL money, that money is just 'created' by governments etc etc.

All true but what makes fiat money actual money is precisely the fact that it is created, supported and backed by governments. It's nothing to do with scarcity, security, transparency and all the other arguments for bitcoin. It's one thing and one thing alone - the relevant government enforces the use of it as a medium of exchange and accepts it as a medium of exchange. There's a clue in the name after all.

Bitcoin is very clever but I still don't understand the mechanism by which it becomes a real currency rather than a bubbly investment. And if it never becomes a currency, what is it actually for?

I get that libertarians who don't believe in governments are excited about it but other than that I must admit I find it mystifying and I've never heard a decent explanation for why it will maintain its value.

i think you ve just confirmed my fears, a large proportion of people believe that the majority of our money supply is created by governments, this is in fact untrue. the majority of money supply is actually created by banks in the form of loans, i.e. debt, this is done by whats called 'double entry book-keeping'. this has been recently confirmed by the english central bank and the german Bundesbank. some believe that this equates to roughly 97% of the total money supply.

governments to can create money in the form of bonds, but a lot are discouraged to do so, largely due to conservative thinking regarding these matters, opting for a more reduced role in money creation, i.e 'balancing the books'.

effectively we have left the majority of our money creation abilities to the financial sector, but i do feel we must now ask, is this approach working for the benefit of all, and is it the best approach?

Geuze

All regular economics textbooks discuss the role of comm banks in the money creation process.

Geuze

Wanderer78 wrote: »

governments to can create money in the form of bonds, but a lot are discouraged to do so, largely due to conservative thinking regarding these matters, opting for a more reduced role in money creation, i.e 'balancing the books'.

What exactly is meant here?

Govts issue debt all the time, they issue bonds, and borrow funds. This totally normal.

The issuing of bonds is borrowing, and is not a deliberate increase in the money stock.

Dohnjoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

effectively we have left the majority of our money creation abilities to the financial sector, but i do feel we must now ask, is this approach working for the benefit of all, and is it the best approach?

There are no glaring issues with the current system if it's done right. It's in place pretty much everywhere.

Cookie_Monster

DominoDub wrote: »

Wow I had just finished reading this... when I spotted this thread

https://qz.com/1054805/what-its-like-working-at-a-sprawling-bitcoin-mine-in-inner-mongolia/

That's insane :eek:

what a waste of energy and resources for nothing more than a virtual currency.

Sheeps

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

That's insane :eek:

what a waste of energy and resources for nothing more than a virtual currency.

So long as people want it and it can be exchanged for fiat currency it has real value. You make it sound worthless. I personally know 2 millionaires who are just that because of it's value.

This video is 26 minutes long but gives a great overview of how bitcoin works and what mining does. I highly recommend it as it covers some general crypto stuff as well at a basic level.

To people who call it a pyramid scheme, you're just refusing to learn what it is. A classic comparison would be if we bought gold and shops accepted it as payment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBC-nXj3Ng4

https://www.reddit.com/r/mealtimevideos/comments/6lviv8/ever_wonder_how_bitcoin_and_other/

Sheeps

Sheeps wrote: »

So long as people want it and it can be exchanged for fiat currency it has real value. You make it sound worthless. I personally know 2 millionaires who are just that because of it's value.

These type of arguments do bitcoin proponents no favours at all.

"If someone will pay for it it has value". Well yes, of course. That's a given. Also applies to tulips and any other previous bubble.

"I know 2 millionaires" etc. Well yes, of course. Also applies to tulips and any other previous bubble.

What is necessary is to explain the intrinsic value of bitcoin. As some have noted the closest comparison is gold, but I would argue it is possible to explain the intrinsic value of gold beyond an investment vehicle.

If anything the frothy and volatile nature of bitcoin's dollar value only confirms that we don't really know its intrinsic value.

Ush1

Deleted User wrote: »

These type of arguments do bitcoin proponents no favours at all.

"If someone will pay for it it has value". Well yes, of course. That's a given. Also applies to tulips and any other previous bubble.

"I know 2 millionaires" etc. Well yes, of course. Also applies to tulips and any other previous bubble.

What is necessary is to explain the intrinsic value of bitcoin. As some have noted the closest comparison is gold, but I would argue it is possible to explain the intrinsic value of gold beyond an investment vehicle.

If anything the frothy and volatile nature of bitcoin's dollar value only confirms that we don't really know its intrinsic value.

What's the intrinsic value of dollars? Hasn't been a gold standard since the seventies I think.

Ush1

Ush1 wrote: »

What's the intrinsic value of dollars? Hasn't been a gold standard since the seventies I think.

The intrinsic value of dollars is that it is the official currency of the USA as mandated by the US government.

Ush1

Deleted User wrote: »

The intrinsic value of dollars is that it is the official currency of the USA as mandated by the US government.

Hmm, not sure that's exactly "intrinsic" value of the dollar itself...

Ush1

Ush1 wrote: »

Hmm, not sure that's exactly "intrinsic" value of the dollar itself...

Well, it is. Ultimately (and in a simple terms) what gives the dollar its value is that it is issued by, and accepted as payment by, the government of the US.

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/fair-price-bitcoin-zero.html

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Ush1

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, it is. Ultimately (and in a simple terms) what gives the dollar its value is that it is issued by, and accepted as payment by, the government of the US.

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/fair-price-bitcoin-zero.html

Still don't think that's intrinsic value I'm afraid, and the article seems more intent on comparing bitcoin to gold, than bitcoin to dollar.

LuckyLloyd

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Yeah I'm not too good with the tech part, and I'll probably butcher this horribly, but..

Think of it like a mini lottery programmed to make a few coins available every few minutes to those that enter. In order to enter the lottery you have to start your PC solving the problem (mining). So your PC becomes like having a lottery ticket. The more PC's you have (mining power) the more tickets you have, the higher chance of "winning" every few minutes

Your reward will be a few coins

All this is recorded on a public ledger and the coins go to your address on that public ledger. Everyone can see it, but only you can access it with a private key (password)

All of this is "group-validated" by other machines to avoid cheating or duplication

The smart programme that you were solving for the coins will have a raft of features built in, e.g. a limited number of coins that will ever be produced, difficulty of mining increasing over time, etc

You can e.g. transfer the coins from your address to another address (of a shop) to pay for something

All of which is recorded and validated on the central ledger

What percentage of total coins have been issued at this stage would anyone know?

alb

16,522,663 out of about 21,000,000

LuckyLloyd

alb wrote: »

16,522,663 out of about 21,000,000

Thanks. So once all coins have been successfully mined, where is that likely to leave the project? Without any chance of reward for continuing to download and verify the ledger and history of same how will the entire thing be maintained?

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yes, for various reasons Venezuela is failing as a state and so the currency associated with that state is worth less and less. That's EXACTLY how it works, you are proving my point.

The Atlantic article is more of an opinion piece and says nothing about Venezuelans using bitcoin to pay for necessities.

Budawanny

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Thanks. So once all coins have been successfully mined, where is that likely to leave the project? Without any chance of reward for continuing to download and verify the ledger and history of same how will the entire thing be maintained?

Current projections are that wont happen till 2140 because the difficulty of discovering a token increases over time.

LuckyLloyd

Budawanny wrote: »

Current projections are that wont happen till 2140 because the difficulty of discovering a token increases over time.

Right, but:

1) if we reach a point where it becomes so difficult to mine a coin that mining farms in China no longer are viable what is the effect on the reliability of the ledger?
2) if the current computing power (or inflated equivalent over the next 123 years) hangs in there mining the coins up to 2140 what happens at that point?

blackwhite

Wanderer78 wrote: »

more boring regularly trotted out crap, yes yes those lefties and their socialist/communist ways:rolleyes: BORING!

the alternatives i speak of are actually in operation in capitalist countries such as america and germany, one of my favourite being 'public banking'

dont forget, the majority of the 'money' supply, is in fact in the form of debt!;)

the highlighted statement is an interesting one, care to back it up!



i think you ve just confirmed my fears, a large proportion of people believe that the majority of our money supply is created by governments, this is in fact untrue. the majority of money supply is actually created by banks in the form of loans, i.e. debt, this is done by whats called 'double entry book-keeping'. this has been recently confirmed by the english central bank and the german Bundesbank. some believe that this equates to roughly 97% of the total money supply.

governments to can create money in the form of bonds, but a lot are discouraged to do so, largely due to conservative thinking regarding these matters, opting for a more reduced role in money creation, i.e 'balancing the books'.

effectively we have left the majority of our money creation abilities to the financial sector, but i do feel we must now ask, is this approach working for the benefit of all, and is it the best approach?

To be honest - all you seem to be doing is repeating stuff you've seen in a youtube video and confirming that you don't actually understand a word of what you are typing.

Fractional reserve banking & lending isn't the arbitrary magicing up of money by banks. It's tighly regulated and controlled by central banks (which are a branch of Govt), and banks are restricted in how much they are allowed lend out by reference to a central bank defined multiple against their desposits and capital reserves.

But I know it's pointless actually explaining any of the detail of it to you, because if it's not a 30 minute youtube video that just re-confirms whatever you want it to say, then you won't pay the slightest bit of attention.

Budawanny

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Right, but:

1) if we reach a point where it becomes so difficult to mine a coin that mining farms in China no longer are viable what is the effect on the reliability of the ledger?
2) if the current computing power (or inflated equivalent over the next 123 years) hangs in there mining the coins up to 2140 what happens at that point?

For number 1 it will be viable because the increase in difficulty . i.e scarcity will mean a associated increase in value.
And number 2, in theory is transaction fees will incentivise the miners.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

alb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Right, but:

1) if we reach a point where it becomes so difficult to mine a coin that mining farms in China no longer are viable what is the effect on the reliability of the ledger?
2) if the current computing power (or inflated equivalent over the next 123 years) hangs in there mining the coins up to 2140 what happens at that point?

The mining difficulty adjusts every 2 weeks so that the average time to solve a block is 10 minutes, so if mining power reduces, then it gets easier. The number of coins awarded every block (so every 10 minutes) halves every 4 years, it started at 50, it has halved twice, so it's currently 12.5. So regardless of mining power the mining reward will still be steadily distributed in a gradually decreasing manner between now and 2140.

Miners also get to keep the transactions fees of any transactions they include in blocks. As the reward has been going down the number of transactions, and the fees have been rising. The idea was that over time the fees would replace the block reward gradually, and so far it's been working like that.

LuckyLloyd

Budawanny wrote: »

For number 1 it will be viable because the increase in difficulty . i.e scarcity will mean a associated increase in value.

Okay, that makes sense as a dependency / assumption.

I'm still struggling to see how this translates from an investment instrument or precious material to an actual working currency though, considering the underpinning parameters. If it plays out as hoped, with ever rising values per coin and ever rising computing power managing the ledger and history of same, surely there are practical issues created from a day to day currency perspective. We'd be using 1/xxxxxx of a coin to make purchases. The grunt force required to interface with the ledger would presumably be impractical when compared to the way ATMs and banking currently works? And how can there ever be full faith in a currency that falls apart as a wealth instrument if:

A) People stop mining it
All coins are mined

While we won't live to see 2140, I struggle to see humans truly embracing time bound instruments of wealth and buying into such a temporary view where money is concerned. We still dream of amassing wealth that is transferable.

Wanderer78

blackwhite wrote:

To be honest - all you seem to be doing is repeating stuff you've seen in a youtube video and confirming that you don't actually understand a word of what you are typing.

My research goes way beyond very useful resources such as YouTube, my main sources would be people such as Ellen Brown, Steve keen, Michael Hudson, Jim Richards, Bill black etc etc

blackwhite wrote:

Fractional reserve banking & lending isn't the arbitrary magicing up of money by banks. It's tighly regulated and controlled by central banks (which are a branch of Govt), and banks are restricted in how much they are allowed lend out by reference to a central bank defined multiple against their desposits and capital reserves.

Not regulated enough in my opinion and according to some, some of our central banks are not entirely public bodies, some claiming that some central banks are actually almost 100% privately owned. Of course banks have limits on the amounts of debt based money they can produce, and rightfully so, but I am sold on the idea of public banking. I do think they would benefit society greatly, of course they would not solve all our financial problems, but would give us more control and input into our financial system

blackwhite wrote:

But I know it's pointless actually explaining any of the detail of it to you, because if it's not a 30 minute youtube video that just re-confirms whatever you want it to say, then you won't pay the slightest bit of attention.

If you have any recommendations of individuals or anything at all that would further my knowledge on these subject matters, please do let me know. Thank you

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Because of the state the Venezuelan government and economy is in.

The fact that the Dollar and Euro are strong, and the Bolivar is weak, proves the point that the value of a currency is ultimately derived from the government that backs it.

Dohnjoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

some claiming that some central banks are actually almost 100% privately owned.

Some of these are myths and misunderstandings

If you have any recommendations of individuals or anything at all that would further my knowledge on these subject matters, please do let me know. Thank you

"The Ascent of Money", a 6 part from Channel 4 narrated by historian Neil Ferguson (should be available on youtube), objective, easy to understand - won an Emmy I think

If you have the time, Coursera.org and Edx have excellent free online modules and courses from the best universities in the world

Wanderer78

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Some of these are myths and misunderstandings

"The Ascent of Money", a 6 part from Channel 4 narrated by historian Neil Ferguson (should be available on youtube), objective, easy to understand - won an Emmy I think

If you have the time, Coursera.org and Edx have excellent free online modules and courses from the best universities in the world

yea im a little wary of this info to alright but it does seem like theres complex relationships occurring between some governments and their central banks. very interesting though.

im aware of those sites but unfortunately traditional methods of learning dont seem to work for me at all but thank you very much

Dohnjoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

im aware of those sites but unfortunately traditional methods of learning dont seem to work for me at all but thank you very much

I was daunted at first, but one of the courses ended up being short youtube-style videos with a handful of tickbox questions after. Was a breeze - pretty much just like browsing youtube in an evening

Otherwise the audiobook - "Stress Test", fascinating insight into just how serious the crisis was and how the Fed (and everyone) dealt with it under pressure

Wanderer78

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I was daunted at first, but one of the courses ended up being short youtube-style videos with a handful of tickbox questions after. Was a breeze - pretty much just like browsing youtube in an evening

Otherwise the audiobook - "Stress Test", fascinating insight into just how serious the crisis was and how the Fed (and everyone) dealt with it under pressure

thats fantastic, i ll try that. thanks. im actually dyslexic and find traditional learning techniques simply dont work for me, after spending many years in our third level institutions

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Why on earth not?

Dohnjoe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Individual politicians and officials in e.g. Europe can have broken the law and be described as corrupt - but to go on and generalise about a majority of governments and systems as corrupt is populist and very subjective as best

Bitcoin then becomes an attractive alternative for most of the world's 7.5 billion people.

Based on a faulty generalisation above. Bitcoin works well as a good black market type of "money" and speculative store of wealth however in it's current guise would be weak as any form of national currency for a myriad of reasons

If you hold Bitcoin, your wealth can't be wiped out by hyperinflation or a socialist coup. It has intrinsic value because it's not a national currency, is not controlled by government, and some bureaucrats can't just print more of it on a whim.

Money generally isn't printed "on a whim", and when it is, disaster usually follows (Zimbabwe, Germany in the 30's)

Your Bitcoin wealth can be wiped out by market manipulation, hacks, bugs, exchange risk, hardware failure, or a dozen other reasons - and there is little or no recourse, no insurance - which is why you will hear many crypto people advise "never put in more than you can afford to lose"

It's extremely risky

Currency/money used to work in similar ways until society demanded more safeguards, risk mitigation, controls, regulation

Speculators and traders love volatility. Normal people, businesses and governments don't. They demand stability.