The current trend of removing cash is a serious mistake

Eric Cartman

makeorbrake wrote: »

Bitcoin hit some snags in terms of transaction cost/time. However, that doesn't mean that issues cannot be overcome. That issue is being overcome through layer 1 solution, Lightning Network where transactions take seconds and fees are pennies.



1 Percent - that's the level of illicit transactions carried out using bitcoin in 2019. The vast majority of illicit transactions are carried out using cash.


I disagree. Paypal are gearing up to offer crypto - exposing it to 325 million active account holders. The number of bitcoin addresses holding greater than 0.1BTC reached a new all time high of over 3 million in June. The OCC in the US gave banks the OK to custody crypto last week.



See above. Data shows that not to be the case. However, to be clear - if it were the case or it becomes the case, so what? If decentralised cryptocurrency like bitcoin can act as a societal good, the fact that a minority use it for illicit activity is not a reason to deprive the rest of society from using it.



You made the same claims in 2018 but still no sign of it all coming tumbling down. All I've seen since then is bitcoin and digital assets generally moving forward in terms of the infrastructure being built out for it. When does it fall apart then Eric?


And you're using that experience from over 2 years ago as a reference point. That's outdated. The Coinbases, Krakens and Bitstamps of this world have become much more professional since then.



And in 2018, you claimed the very same thing. I corrected you on it (just as I corrected someone else on it here) and you agreed back then you shouldn't call it a ponzi scheme. For a ponzi scheme to exist, there has to be some central entity hustling that ponzi. That's not the case - never was, never will be. Furthermore, we're eleven years down the road - how many years are you claiming this 'ponzi' will run for? Not credible and on a more basic level, simply not accurate.


Yeah, except that the facts demonstrate that you have no notion what you're talking about.
Layer One Technologies Opened Its Mining Plant in West Texas earlier this year - using renewables.
Bitmain opened a 50MW plant there - again, using renewables. German firm Northern Data is in the middle of building a plant there - using renewables.
Plouton Mining have a 50 acre site in the Movaje desert - using renewables. There are a gazillion other examples - using hydro in China, New York State, Canada, using hot springs in Iceland. One company specialises in setting up kit to mine flared off gas in remote oil fields in the US and Canada. Power stations around the world are installing miners - to make use of excess power that is otherwise wasted. Your 'absolute tripe' claim doesn't check out.

What the hell does that even mean?:rolleyes:
Bitcoin doesn't have feelings - it's a tool - which allows people to store and transact value.

You said back in 2018 that you were sore about bitcoin because "it completely upset the price of computer hardware"....a gig that you were involved with. I guess time hasn't helped to ease that bitterness.

I said it ‘more resembled a ponzi scheme’ as it still does...

If all these exchanges are now more mature, where would I go to change btc into 1 million fiat euro in 1 transaction, how long would it take and why arent there tonnes of irish on soremto road in dalkey who all
Made big crypto money

makeorbrake

Wanderer78 wrote: »

how do you know that over 75% of the energy used to mine was indeed renewable?

Because I've cited the data that verifies exactly that.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

bitcoin, in its current form, cannot be considered a currency, due to its volatility in valuation

Says who? The fairy queen? Whilst it may have an issue with volatility, it's still a digital currency. And just as added salt, know that that volatility has been proven to be reducing - and it will continue to reduce. Be aware that gold was just as volatile in the 70s.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

its currently simply a commodity,

Really? And so, I could whip out my phone right now and send bitcoin to someone the other side of the planet. Can you do that with a lump of gold/silver/coal/coffee/wheat/cotton/corn.:D

thegills

Mrs OBumble wrote:

I've seen a few other small businesses where the card-machine seems to go out of order for weeks at a time. I'm guessing it's because the bank removes some facility from them.

Or they need to launder a bit of cash or understate their income for tax reasons

KyussB

makeorbrake wrote: »

Because I've cited the data that verifies exactly that.

Sure you have...Hear that everybody? Lets just blindly believe the Bitcoin advertiser/propagandist, and take this as true without question! He'll even cite a Bitcoin-invested source with major conflicts of interest that we should just accept as a valid answer, soon, as well...

makeorbrake

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I said it ‘more resembled a ponzi scheme’ as it still does...

This is what you said, Eric ->

"I suppose I should correct it slightly on the ponzi scheme thing, I'm not saying it is one, clearly not".

You know it's wrong to call it one - because it's wholly inaccurate.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

If all these exchanges are now more mature, where would I go to change btc into 1 million fiat euro in 1 transaction

The answer is the same...coinbase, kraken, bitstamp. However, you're getting into big bucks with your 1 million euro, so there's a whole host of OTC dealers who will handle that sort of money for you. Conversion will be instant. If you've completed full KYC/AML to cover that amount, then withdrawal can be done within a reasonable timeframe also.

makeorbrake

KyussB wrote: »

Sure you have...Hear that everybody? Lets just blindly believe the Bitcoin advertiser/propagandist, and take this as true without question! He'll even cite a Bitcoin-invested source with major conflicts of interest that we should just accept as a valid answer, soon, as well...

Fine. Cite your own data - or continue spouting politically motivated garbage. Where is your data? Not one of you have cited jack.

Wanderer78

makeorbrake wrote: »

Fine. Cite your own data - or continue spouting politically motivated garbage. Where is your data?

please explain?

makeorbrake

Wanderer78 wrote: »

please explain?

I already did - see my previous post.

KyussB

Ah the 'ol "here are my unverified claims - cite evidence to prove me wrong!!!" trick - master of deception here...

makeorbrake

KyussB wrote: »

Ah the 'ol "here are my unverified claims - cite evidence to prove me wrong!!!" trick - master of deception here...

So....you kicked up repeatedly about integrity of data - yet you are not prepared to present any yourself. That makes a lot of sense alright. You think everyone should take your word for everything? I wouldn't send you to the shops!

KyussB

The tack that Libertarians and similarly-aligned bad faith propagandists take, is to flip the burden of proof around away from the person making the claim, and onto the people questioning the claims - and then to fling so much unverified bullshit at posters questioning the claims, that it's the informational form of a DDoS attack:
Designed to overwhelm posters and waste enormous amounts of their time, by flipping the burden of proof around and having them debunk endless reams of bullshit, which are never conceded on.

The way to kill that is to just point out in increasing clarity, the evidence in posts that such propaganda tactics are being used.

makeorbrake

KyussB wrote: »

The tack that Libertarians

More politically motivated nonsense.

KyussB wrote: »

and similarly-aligned bad faith propagandists take,

A 'bad faith propagandist' Let me translate that.....=> someone who holds an opinion other than one approved by KyussB.

KyussB wrote: »

is to flip the burden of proof around away from the person making the claim, and onto the people questioning the claims

Ah, I see..you're sitting in the judges chair are we and we little people should run round fetching you stuff?
I went to the trouble of citing data. Not satisifed with that, you claim 'it's the wrong data' (given that it doesn't fit your world view)....but by the same token you won't or more likely cant provide any data that counteracts what I've provided.

I'll remind you that this is a discussion - everyone is equal.

KyussB wrote: »

The way to kill that is to just point out in increasing clarity, the evidence in posts that such propaganda tactics are being used.

Yes, rally the troops my good man. Call in the hounds. Pitiful stuff.

theteal

neutral guy wrote: »

I got letter from bank one day in 2011
They could not understand why I used my card 8 months ago and still no use it
I actually forgot my PIN because was busy on hoovering cash
They said they gonna close my account if I will not explain why wages is coming and no money is leaving
I said I am carpenter,do you know what I mean ?
She said No
Today I fitted kitchen and got 1K in cash I said which I gonna use for my daily expenses for about 1 month
And the next kitchen which I gonna fit next week weekend will pay my rent
She said Would you like come to your account review ( buy bank products,take loan for car ) ?
I said Sorry,I have enough money.

After tax deductions of course?

I mean you'd hardly be saying that cashless society is a bad idea becasue it could impinge on some peoples tax evasion strategies???

KyussB

makeorbrake wrote: »

I went to the trouble of citing data. Not satisifed with that, you claim 'it's the wrong data' (given that it doesn't fit your world view)....but by the same token you won't or more likely cant provide any data that counteracts what I've provided.

I wasted the time checking your posts from the last days - you have not cited any data which answers the question put to you:

Wanderer78 wrote:

how do you know that over 75% of the energy used to mine was indeed renewable?

I predict a bait-and-switch now, where instead of pointing to data which answers that question, you'll point to some random use of renewables as if that answers the above. Then when pressed, you'll cite some laughably conflicted Bitcoin source.

Eric Cartman

KyussB wrote: »

I predict a bait-and-switch now, where instead of pointing to data which answers that question, you'll point to some random use of renewables as if that answers the above. Then when pressed, you'll cite some laughably conflicted Bitcoin source.

This,

An article from bitcoinweekly.com with the first line “coinbase exchange ceo’s figures suggest good thing about coins , this article brought to you by bitcoin secrets, the book on ultimate coin knowledge

i_surge

makeorbrake wrote: »

Oh really? It would be a tad difficult for you to have an issue with speculation given that you've been a participant.
Although it's a bit rich bitching about environmental damage and being a participant in it yourself (even if you're wayward in your environmental damage claims...more to the point, because of them and what you believe).

.


People are responsible for their own decisions. Are you saying that if you make a risky speculative investment, it's all good if it works out but the minute it doesn't it's someone elses fault?
There are scammers and muppets to be found associated with all manner of things - all can be found online. It's not specific to bitcoin - albeit they do tend to use the backdrop of something new and misunderstood. That's not a reflection on the technology or the otherwise good actors in the space. Furthermore, if someone decides to spend time listening to one of these charlatans, that's on them. We're all adults and take responsibility for our own actions.


That's your opinion - and you're entitled to an opinion. However, you can take your suggestion of any dis-ingenuity on my part and shove it where the sun don't shine. I very much believe that it is in the process of establishing itself as a store of value/digital gold/a hedge against fiat currency. That's what I believe. What you believe is a matter for yourself.


Eh, it very much is true. I'll try this one more time. Green energy is abundant and we only capture a fraction of it.
Let's take Plouton Mining - who are building the worlds biggest solar mining farm in the Mojave desert. They invest to make that possible. The energy produced is theirs. Even if they wanted to, it's far from a centre of population so it can't be used elsewhere. So the energy is going to the only purpose it could possibly have in that location - bitcoin mining.

Tell me where the harm is there? Tell me what business it is of yours to demand that that energy be used for another purpose (not that that's even possible in this instance)?



No it can't. Electricity doesn't travel well and there is wastage and cost implications if you try and start moving it over large distances. No doubt you'll suggest next that it doesn't matter and volunteer to spend their money on moving it - and suffer the cost of the energy losses (and be happy to waste more energy).


Well, it should be encouraging. These guys are toast if they can't get the most efficient energy there is. The most efficient energy is going to be renewable. As they keep trying to get the edge in that respect, they're driving efficiency where energy production is concerned.

There is a career in politics or public "relations" waiting for you. Stay away from the science. You sound like a full page BP ad for saving the planet in National Geographic

"Drive efficiency" LOLs

Some people aren't that smart and when conmen con them, the conman is the guilty party.

i_surge

How many god damn kWh per coin?

makeorbrake

KyussB wrote: »

I wasted the time checking your posts from the last days - you have not cited any data which answers the question put to you:

Ah, so this is your process..
- Prove it.
- Data is provided and then it's 'the wrong type of data' (because it doesn't say what KyussB want's it to say).
-When invited to provide the right type of data (that says KyussB wants it to say) - the mere suggestion is an outrage (presumably because there is no authoritative source to back up his world view).

Followed by this latest nonsense.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

This,

An article from bitcoinweekly.com with the first line “coinbase exchange ceo’s figures suggest good thing about coins , this article brought to you by bitcoin secrets, the book on ultimate coin knowledge

Says the guy that's still bitter and twisted from 2018 when apparently bitcoin ate his lunch by conspiring to price him out of computer hardware.

i_surge wrote: »

There is a career in politics or public "relations" waiting for you. Stay away from the science. You sound like a full page BP ad for saving the planet in National Geographic

From the 'save the planet' guy and 'speculation is greedy' - when he speculated himself on bitcoin. He claims (wrongly) that bitcoin mining isn't mainly based on renewables yet despite holding that wayward view, he was fine with himself buying/selling bitcoin.
If only I had that deductive reasoning and moral superiority.

i_surge

makeorbrake wrote: »

Ah, so this is your process..
- Prove it.
- Data is provided and then it's 'the wrong type of data' (because it doesn't say what KyussB want's it to say).
-When invited to provide the right type of data (that says KyussB wants it to say) - the mere suggestion is an outrage (presumably because there is no authoritative source to back up his world view).

Followed by this latest nonsense.


Says the guy that's still bitter and twisted from 2018 when apparently bitcoin ate his lunch by conspiring to price him out of computer hardware.


From the 'save the planet' guy and 'speculation is greedy' - when he speculated himself on bitcoin. He claims (wrongly) that bitcoin mining isn't mainly based on renewables yet despite holding that wayward view, he was fine with himself buying/selling bitcoin.
If only I had that deductive reasoning and moral superiority.

If you don't have the intelligence to untangle what you are trying to paint as conflicting views when they are not, that is your problem.

Plenty of questions have been asked which you have only deflected and you don't have the integrity to admit when you are wrong and just move on with the discussion in a positive way like a reasonable person.

You have descended into trying to call people sore losers here, come on now. Maybe it is you that lost a fortune and are still bag holding and hoping. It would help explain the religious zeal about it being the future.

I also asked you not to be aggressive and you couldn't keep your cool.

Best of luck with it

makeorbrake

i_surge wrote: »

Plenty of questions have been asked which you have only deflected and you don't have the integrity to admit when you are wrong and just move on with the discussion in a positive way like a reasonable person.

I've gone point to point on the topic with you and others - the integrity of what I've put across stands. You and others have continually tried to cast aspertions - and trash cited data when you won't or can't provide any yourselves.
You claim 'deflected this' and 'lack of integrity' that because my view doesn't fit in with your world view.

i_surge wrote: »

You have descended into trying to call people sore losers here, come on now.

I think it's relevant when someone comes on here with criticisms that are outdated, giving the impression that 2018 was the last contact they had with crypto - that folks know that he's on record as saying that he doesn't want bitcoin/crypto to succeed 'because it completely upset the market for computer hardware' (cards repurposed for bitcoin mining in this case) - creating a difficulty for the business he was in at the time. That is an admission of having a coloured view on the topic.

i_surge wrote: »

Maybe it is you that lost a fortune and are still bag holding and hoping. It would help explain the religious zeal about it being the future.

And maybe I see people misrepresent something time and time again and I want any neutral to see that what they claim is a lie.

i_surge

makeorbrake wrote: »

I've gone point to point on the topic with you and others - the integrity of what I've put across stands. You and others have continually tried to cast aspertions - and trash cited data when you won't or can't provide any yourselves.
You claim 'deflected this' and 'lack of integrity' that because my view doesn't fit in with your world view.


I think it's relevant when someone comes on here with criticisms that are outdated, giving the impression that 2018 was the last contact they had with crypto - that folks know that he's on record as saying that he doesn't want bitcoin/crypto to succeed 'because it completely upset the market for computer hardware' (cards repurposed for bitcoin mining in this case) - creating a difficulty for the business he was in at the time. That is an admission of having a coloured view on the topic.


And maybe I see people misrepresent something time and time again and I want any neutral to see that what they claim is a lie.

Well if you were acting in good faith which you are not you would have told me how many kWh by now and you would at least acknowledge that other more worthy things could be computed with the same power or manufacture something useful at that location...anything half productive that isn't converting energy into notional money please!

makeorbrake

i_surge wrote: »

Well if you were acting in good faith which you are not you would have told me how many kWh by now

Firstly, you or anyone else here making demands does not represent 'good faith' in a discussion. Secondly, either one of us could easily go out and find that information. However, given that I've gone to the trouble of providing proof of widespread (and majority) use of renewable power in bitcoin mining, why should I even bother given that you keep stating that's not the case - and don't provide a grain of evidence to back up your claim?

Even if we get beyond that, if it's accepted that the vast majority of bitcoin mining uses renewables, what does it even matter how many kWh are required per bitcoin? It becomes a moot point.

i_surge wrote: »

and you would at least acknowledge that other more worthy things could be computed with the same power or manufacture something useful at that location...anything half productive that isn't converting energy into notional money please!

I've asked you many times to acknowledge the work that bitcoin mining achieves - which is...
A. securing the bitcoin network
and
B. confirming transactions on the bitcoin network.

If you can't recognise that, then how could that aspect of the discussion progress further? The bottom line here is that when you enter a debate with this preconceived notion that bitcoin is pointless, you are going to have no appreciation whatsoever for bitcoin mining, the need for it and the purpose that it serves.
If you are so outraged at the energy expended on bitcoin mining, why are you not outraged at the energy that is expended via the conventional financial system?

Cal4567

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The ATM was introduced to Ireland in 1980 , somebody who is 90 today would have been 50 at that point, still a decade of working left in them. I don't think for one second theres any elderly person who is sill independent and functional enough to be in charge of their own money who has no idea how to use an ATM.

Good point. Gets annoying when we hear hypothetical arguments banded about as if they are cold hard facts. Just like elderly or poor people aren't internet savvy.

When need a cashless society to target the criminal scumbags so that every bloody penny they are peddling their filth with can be recorded. Not a moment too soon. And that goes also for every gob****e who pays cash to not pay VAT. I have no concerns with what info this gives someone else about me. That's because I have nothing to hide.

Bubbaclaus

I'm tired of the ageist mantra that the elderly are incapable of figuring out a card and a 4 digit pin (or literally just tapping a card off the machine).

Wanderer78

Cal4567 wrote: »

Good point. Gets annoying when we hear hypothetical arguments banded about as if they are cold hard facts. Just like elderly or poor people aren't internet savvy.

When need a cashless society to target the criminal scumbags so that every bloody penny they are peddling their filth with can be recorded. Not a moment too soon. And that goes also for every gob****e who pays cash to not pay VAT. I have no concerns with what info this gives someone else about me. That's because I have nothing to hide.

could it be easier to control societies, by having more control over their monetary systems?

neutral guy

harrylittle wrote: »

Thats what they want get ride of cash and bring in negative interest rates and a transaction tax .. watch your money drain away 2-3 % a year

My money does not dry away 2-3 per cent every year !
If I will buy car for 20 K with loan it will cost me 24K finaly
If I will pay by cash the seller will give me 17K price !
The more cashless you are the more you have to spend !

i_surge

makeorbrake wrote: »

Firstly, you or anyone else here making demands does not represent 'good faith' in a discussion. Secondly, either one of us could easily go out and find that information. However, given that I've gone to the trouble of providing proof of widespread (and majority) use of renewable power in bitcoin mining, why should I even bother given that you keep stating that's not the case - and don't provide a grain of evidence to back up your claim?

Even if we get beyond that, if it's accepted that the vast majority of bitcoin mining uses renewables, what does it even matter how many kWh are required per bitcoin? It becomes a moot point.


I've asked you many times to acknowledge the work that bitcoin mining achieves - which is...
A. securing the bitcoin network
and
B. confirming transactions on the bitcoin network.

If you can't recognise that, then how could that aspect of the discussion progress further? The bottom line here is that when you enter a debate with this preconceived notion that bitcoin is pointless, you are going to have no appreciation whatsoever for bitcoin mining, the need for it and the purpose that it serves.
If you are so outraged at the energy expended on bitcoin mining, why are you not outraged at the energy that is expended via the conventional financial system?

I know it serves those functions, but we both know that is in no way the primary motivation for mining and I know why you don't want to reveal how much energy is consumed.

Seeing as you will only furnish us with the information that suits you I went to a mining calculator and worked out the following at 0.1 dollars per kWh. Default setting on the site, hit calculate....

Time Frame /BTC Reward /Revenue /Power Cost /Pool Fees /Profit (in USD)
Annually 0.3051 $3,466.38 $3,041.47 $0.00 $424.91

270,000 dollars worth of electricity to generate a pre-tax income of 30,000.

Absolutely ****ing madness in other words and easily much worse than the rival traditional financial services on a kWh/earning basis. Crazy!!!

Back of an envelope calculation...you could manufacture 50+ cars with the same amount of energy.

Simply a grotesque practice, no argument except greed is good.

Cal4567

Wanderer78 wrote: »

could it be easier to control societies, by having more control over their monetary systems?

Do I feel controlled? No, I don't. Will I feel more controlled if I don't use cash ever again? No.

Wanderer78

Cal4567 wrote: »

Do I feel controlled? No, I don't. Will I feel more controlled if I don't use cash ever again? No.

theres a wee country called greece, that got into a spot of bother a few years ago, have a look what happened there, when the powers to be decided to shut down their monetary system! careful what you wish for folks!

neutral guy

Cal4567 wrote: »

Do I feel controlled? No, I don't. Will I feel more controlled if I don't use cash ever again? No.

The first at all I waste about 50 euros per year feeding bank cashless system because I pay fees
Every single year I getting letter from bank were they asking me about were and what I have ! If I will not answer them questions they as they say Will Close My bank account !
I got phone call one day and bank representative was asking me how much money I have and were I keep them !!! Any property abroad,any accounts in other banks !?
Yes,for sure,if you always have not enough money for food because you have plenty loans then you have to be cashless ! Because using Visa or Mastercard you always can take loan ! And waste your 2-3 per cent of your money for interest !