>The social networking giant has linked with 28 partners including Mastercard, PayPal and Uber to form Libra Association, a Geneva-based entity governing the new digital coin
>To facilitate transactions, Facebook also created Calibra, a subsidiary that will offer digital wallets to save, send and spend Libras. Calibra will be connected to Facebook messaging platforms Messenger and WhatsApp.
>The whole system is scheduled to launch in the first half of 2020.
>The name "Libra" comes from Roman weight measurements, the astrological sign for justice and the French word for freedom, said David Marcus, who heads the project for Facebook.
>French word for "freedom"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-crypto/facebook-reveals-libra-cryptocurrency-sparking-new-privacy-concerns-idUSKCN1TJ0TN
>>4568 This will probably be centralized bullshit, but is good for adoption, after more than a year normalcattle is talking about cryptocurrencies again.
Unironically get in boys, BTC will be back to 20k, ETH to 1K before the end of the year.
If you think you're the only player who wants money to escape governmental control, well, think again buddy. xD
Cryptocurrencies are unironically a step into the Brave New World dystopia. Like, not THE step, but the (((world banks))) clearly show the interest, as cryptos are as free trade-y as it gets. Why would people want crypto is actually beyond me.
>>4576 Dude your reasoning makes absolute no sense, cryptocurrencies(the good ones at least) promote decentralization and take away control from the (((middleman))), they are literally the only way we have to avoid total centralization of economic control to few corporations and families.
>the (((world banks))) clearly show the interest
Of course they do, they're scared and don't want to lose their power, this fact alone says a lot on how cryptocurrencies are an important tool for us.
>as cryptos are as free trade-y as it gets
commie detected...i see
>>4576 Maybe it'll be a situation where the regular currencies start to hyper-inflate to the moon and the cryptocurrencies swoop in to "save" everyone. Oh, and you'll need to carry around a cellphone all the time in order to use them.
>>4576 Your mostly correct, however, what will you do if they legislate only certain ones into law and make all other ones illegal? If decentralization remains legal and you can diversify among different cryptos, that would not be too bad so you can compete against the credit card companies.
>>4577 There are huge bitcoin hoarders right now and AFAIK it takes about half the bitcoins in the existence to really fuck the blockchain over, so I dunno how it's escaping any (((central control))) at all.
>Of course they do, they're scared and don't want to lose their power
What makes you think they're scared? They could just take something everybody uses under control and you will be left with some fringe shit and you better pray it would be some darkcoin, as BTC is NOT safe to use for such purposes.
Like, the way I see it, BTC takes off only because online payment systems have become more anal.
>commie detected...i see
WTF is this logical chain?
Commies wanted to eliminate money altogether, and if it's possible at all, it's clearly better BTW.
>>4580 >it takes about half the bitcoins in the existence to really fuck the blockchain over
You're factually wrong that's not how the bitcoin blockchain works, it doesn't matter how much bitcoin do you have, bitcoin uses Proof-of-Work as a consensus method, ever hear about mining? To correctly do a 50% attack you would need a huge amount of computational power, it's not impossible but even in that case it would be possible to fork the chain and revert the changes. Please study this stuff before spreading misinformation. It is escaping central control as long as the miners are independent entities.
>They could just take something everybody uses under control and you will be left with some fringe shit and you better pray it would be some darkcoin, as BTC is NOT safe to use for such purposes.
They are scared, especially credit card companies and paypal, try to loop up all the anti-crypto shilling warren buffet was doing or the ceos of bank. Do you mean BTC is not safe as it's not anonymous? You have pseudo-anonimity as long as you don;t link your address to your identity and Monero exists.
>WTF is this logical chain?
People that dislike free-market are either CIAniggers, boot-lickers or commies, commies don't want to eliminate money they want to centralize control of economy and give it to the state, read Marx.
>>4582 >It is escaping central control as long as the miners are independent entities.
Making a coin unusable would be a successful attack for (((them))), yaknow. You can keep forking and lose users though.
>They are scared, especially credit card companies and paypal
Well payment systems are not the (((World Banking System))), DUH.
>anti-crypto shilling warren buffet was doing or the ceos of bank
a) Boomer bank people may not understand the new system, but that doesn't mean new people don't
b) World banks are private organisations themselves BTW
c) "The world’s biggest banks are launching a platform designed to utilize blockchain-based currencies that are 100% backed by central banks." - LMAO
Like, I ain't saying that coins ain't free RN. I'm saying that banks will take them over.
>they want to centralize control of economy and give it to the state
That may be one of the commie means, but not their goal.
>In political and social sciences, communism is the philosophical, social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.
>>4585 >using commiepedia definitions of gommunism to make a point
Lol.
>That may be one of the commie means, but not their goal.
That doesn't mean that they don't want to centralize control of economy and give it to the state. Since doing so is necessary to achieve their delusions, it's part of their goal.
>>4585 >Making a coin unusable would be a successful attack for (((them))), yaknow. You can keep forking and lose users though.
And what are you implying exactly, let's not do anything and let them win? Cryptocurrencies are engineered in a way that makes really hard doing what you're saying, do you have anything better? Cryptos are based as fuck.
>Boomer bank people may not understand the new system, but that doesn't mean new people don't
The kind of people that get to certain kind of positions are not stupid trust me, if they were bashing crypto it was to make sure that the people that gives them money to invest keeps their money with them and doesn't switch to crypto.
>World banks are private organisations themselves
Most of big banks are traded pubicly, i own some bonds from some big banks lulz, how is that private.
>That may be one of the commie means, but not their goal.
This how commie faggotry works, unless you are homeless or a member of the party you are dirty bourgeoisie and you don't deserve the money you made with your work, so now we take away your property from you and we redistribute it to muh people, how do you do it? You first give all resources to the state and then the state will redistribute them "equally"(after the (((members of the party))) gets their share of course) which is exactly what i said. This is all documented history from soviet russia welcome to the real world.
>>4589 >And what are you implying exactly, let's not do anything and let them win?
Well, what do they "win" exactly? Is the current system not "fair"? Do you think the system is rigged and do you imply the coins are rigged somewhat less?
>do you have anything better
I didn't give it much thought, but what do you think of the energy-tied currency?
>The kind of people that get to certain kind of positions are not stupid trust me
They may be smart alright, but coins, considering their shortcomings, are even worse than fiat currencies, since fiat currencies are backed with their respective national economies at least, so these bank people might just dismiss them. Like, unless your crypto is in every shop and represents the most money mass at every big trading platform, it is a fucking fringe toy. BTC was a thing since 2009, I've learned about its existence in 2011 and I still fail to see the reasons to use it. Like, actually use it. I don't do trading.
>Most of big banks are traded pubicly, i own some bonds from some big banks lulz, how is that private.
That means they are not commie tier nor state-owned or something. Shares or whatever are distributed among the private owners.
And owning some shares doesn't give you control over the organisation anyway.
>This is all documented history from soviet russia welcome to the real world.
This is irrelevant.
Communism fails exactly because there are no perceivable means to reach that goal, and people have to resort to revolution, terrorism and stateism first. xD
Like, it's weird that people want to build it in the first place. Like, the end goal is clearly morally superior to everything else imaginable, but no way to achieve it means you're not gonna achieve it. RIP
>>4577 >cryptocurrencies(the good ones at least) promote decentralization
This is the fault on your reasoning. Facebook and partners don't want decentralization.
This is what will actually happen:
>""Libra"" gets created using the blockchain concept, except no one can mine it
>The payment method gets embedded on all possible social media from facebook
>Paypal implements it together with the current working method of payment available and reduce transaction costs in case you use it
>Uber pushs it reducing drivers and passagers tax percentage in case they do transactions with "Libra"
>All bankers start to create a lobby on Wall Street
>Libra/Calibra gets best rankings on NASDAQ and SP-500, making everyone willing to invest on it
>Everyone buying iPhones with ""Libra""
>Youtube channels saying how "revolutionary and easy to use" it is
>Other services will be *required* by the public to use it as well, such as Amazon and Alphabet
>Meanwhile, facebook has control over every metadata.
>This data will be integrated with consumer behavior analysis they already have
>Facebook sells those data to marketing companies at first
>Years later, Facebook opens a marketplace to take down Amazon/eBay at once
>Get monopoly over >60% of the data on the internet
>With the marketplace and the coin, they got so much money they buy other companies: Youtube at first, then Amazon
>They get bored and buy Netflix to integrate with everything, because why not.
>OP pic turns real.
If it wasn't for the US antitrust law this is would easily happen. But then, US government is a mafia as big as those companies, so...
>>4585 >That may be one of the commie means, but not their goal.
Go read about that closely. You'll see communism *requires* giving power to the state because someone has to control the distribution of wealth, which generates a class (bureaucrats). Once a class gets power, people will envy their position and this destabilizes the system. The state will try to 'contain' this destabilization using aggression. Eventually this scales to a full civil war, because economy will stop (as people will not work anymore). Once the economy stops, people don't have food. Humans without food don't work very well...
And then death comes to the country.
This have repeated throughout history many times (see Cuba, USSR and recently Venezuela).
>>4581 Humm... their control over volatility seems childish. This can be used for small groups, but never for a full scale economy.
I think the only cryptocoin today that has good basis would be Cardano. Maybe it can even be extended to work with zk-SNARKs, making it anonymous:
https://whycardano.com/science-and-engineering/ https://z.cash/technology/zksnarks
>>4590 >energy-backed currency
If you read it on nanochan, then it was my idea. Energy is all that is required to sustain life. With enough energy, you can set up a self-contained ecosystem (in theory; technology isn't advanced enough to do is properly yet, look at the ISS for a partial example). Energy is ultimately a finite resource - entropy dictates that.
Energy is absolutely necessary to run a nation. It is used everywhere, and modern technology (which is what makes the superior seperate from the inferior) depends on it. Using an energy-backed currency, fuel and electricity prices would be more stable.
Energy is also decentralized. Any average joe can run a generator in his backyard. Any scientists or tinkerer who gets a good idea on how to generate it more efficiently can do so and earn money. It's a bit like bitcoin, but actually useful and feasible on a national scale. More thought and exploration of its drawbacks is required, of course, but I think it's better than blawkchain for a start - energy doesn't strictly require electronics and semiconductors to function.
>>4590 >Well, what do they "win" exactly? Is the current system not "fair"? Do you think the system is rigged and do you imply the coins are rigged somewhat less?
Yes i think the current system is rigged and unfair:
fiat requires me to trust companies and governments while it's obvious that they don't deserve any trust, cryptos are trustless
fiat puts control of transaction fees in the hands of banks and payment processors which makes for unnecessary fees for profit, cryptos only use fees for what is necessary you can actually choose how much fee you want to pay, some cryptos are designed to not have fees at all
fiat is governed by a central entity that is prone to corruption and political decisions cryptos are decentralized and resistand against corruption
fiat payment processors like credit cards companies and paypal can be used for censorship, see deplatforming, cryptos cannot be used to censor
fiat one day is gonna become digital only it's already happening in some countries and all of the metadata is used to track and profiles you, cryptos are not linked to your real identity and some are even anonymous
as you can see "coins are rigged somewhat less" indeed.
>Like, the end goal is clearly morally superior to everything else imaginable
I disagree, i'm against equality, in my opinion equality is unfair, meritocracy is fairness, we are not all equal some are smarter some are dumber, some should be paid more, some should be paid less, the problem now if that the system is organized in a way to favor particular group of people regardless of their merit, for example politicians that manipulare people or companies that use deception and false advertising and then lobby the gov to have their way.
>>4591 >This is the fault on your reasoning. Facebook and partners don't want decentralization.
Read >>4575 i never said that facebook care about decentralization, i just said that it will favor indirectly other cryptos adoption, i don't have a crystal ball though.
>Humm... their control over volatility seems childish.
DAI survived though all 2018 without failing, it resisted a crisis already.
>>4592 Pretty cool stuff asukafag. I'm interested. I have a doubt thogh, since energy on earth is limited and people wants to profit, won't such a currency bring to the ecological death of the planet and pollution everywhere?
>If you read it on nanochan, then it was my idea.
Link to previous thread then u.u
>>4593 >I have a doubt thogh, since energy on earth is limited and people wants to profit, won't such a currency bring to the ecological death of the planet and pollution everywhere?
Generating infinite energy will not allow you to have infinite money. Only a certain amount of energy is required by a country, and generating more than this is going to reduce your profits. Just like bitcoin mining becomes less profitable when more people are mining. I think it will be a self-regulating system for the most part.
Of course, air pollution regulations would be required to take care of greedy faggots. For example, if your neighbors complain about pollution blowing into their property, then the production of excessive pollution on your property would be investigated and possibly limited. Cutting down trees that aren't on your property would be forbidden, and ecologically important forests would become national parks which are publicly owned so nobody can cut them down.
In a country like chinkland, this system would never work because people are already accustomed to living in dirt, filth and cancerous air. When the population is reasonably responsible and forward-looking, this problem would go away as people look to biodiesel, wood gas and other forms of non-mineral fuels which can be produced indefinitely, unlike fossil fuels. In Japan, for example, a hypothetical hapa ethnostate, or even in white countries, this problem would not be very severe, since nips, hapas and whites don't enjoy living in their own filth.
>>4593 >it's obvious that they don't deserve any trust
It's not obvious at all.
Unless you live in some sort of military dictatorship state-owned monopoly whatever, you have ways to influence their decisions.
>cryptos are trustless
Does it mean you cannot trust them? xD
I mean, if somebody steals your cryptowallet, you are not even protected by law as far as I know. xD
> fiat puts control of transaction fees in the hands of banks and payment processors which makes for unnecessary fees for profit, cryptos only use fees for what is necessary
This doesn't make any sense. So banks receive unfair profits and bitcoin fucks charging 200$ (or how much it was during 10000$ time) for a transaction are fair.
Or one could say it's not the system, it's people who do this shit. xD
>some cryptos are designed to not have fees at all
Those are probably less popular, since running an infrastructure isn't free, and doing charity on the world scale will suck your wallet dry.
> fiat is governed by a central entity that is prone to corruption and political decisions cryptos are decentralized and resistand against corruption
Fiat is governed by a rather large club that may seem consolidated because their strategies of success are kinda same, but that doesn't mean they are "centralized". Like, sure, there is a central bank, but there are lots of them.
As for corruption, well, coins are not immune to that either. They're probably better than fiat on that part though.
But one thing about corruption is it's only bad if you're missing out on that sweet dark economy money. xD It's not that I'm saying that it's a good thing to not miss out, but you essentially propose a great centralization of money control, while being a pro-decentralization, and also you seem to not to take into account that some systems are so backwards that "straightening them out" would probably fuck everyone.
> fiat payment processors like credit cards companies and paypal can be used for censorship, see deplatforming, cryptos cannot be used to censor
It's literally whatever. You will have to have more than cryptocurrency to fight (((them))), since if you're actually a threat, expect a hitman.
And anyway, fiat shines the best with a hard cash, since with cash you may pay completely anonymously and fairly untrackably (tracking bank notes is way harder than blockchain transactions).
> fiat one day is gonna become digital only
When it happens, it's gonna be some government-approved completely-tracked cryptocoin. xD
>cryptos are not linked to your real identity
I don't get this argument.
If you use it IRL, it's going to be connected to you pretty easily.
If you hide behind seven proxies, well, you have to trust the proxies then.
The trust game is not winnable if you want to stay anonymous.
>I disagree, i'm against equality, in my opinion equality is unfair, meritocracy is fairness, we are not all equal some are smarter some are dumber, some should be paid more, some should be paid less, the problem now if that the system is organized in a way to favor particular group of people regardless of their merit, for example politicians that manipulare people or companies that use deception and false advertising and then lobby the gov to have their way.
Communism is not about being paid equally. xD
And meritocracy is not real, as merit is clearly subjective and when it's not, we have some distinct group of people who clearly know what they want and reward their members respectively.
I called communism morally superior, because it's designed to be. Ultimately, commie dream is a fairy tale of nobody to oppress you, because nobody needs to; of nobody to jew you, because everybody can get what they want anyway; and everybody being one big happy family, because there is no other way. Communism has its way in people's minds because that's how people used to live in small rural communities for thousands of years. Sharing is caring. xD
>>4596 >muh gommunism
Communism kind of works in small communities where the moral aptitude of every person is known by every other person. As soon as this stops being the case, then greedy or corrupt people can take advantage of the system. A nation-scale implementation of communism is sure to fail badly. Either that, or it turns into not-real-communism like china.
>muh merit is subjective
Merit is not subjective. How useful you are to yourself is part of the determination of your merit. How useful you are to your country is part of the determination of your merit. How well your country can defeat other countries and/or defend itself is part of the determination of your country's merit. Meritocracy is literally a flawless dogma to have, in corporate, military, or whatever non-family environment you are in.
Let's say you are working for a car manufacturer. Let's say that you suggest car designs that are not very helpful, and you say that the company should switch to making motorcycles. This is not helpful to the manufacturer even if your motorcycle design is the best in the world, and thus you are deemed to have a low merit. This is perfectly reasonable.
On the other hand, let's say that you are working for a mcdonalds. You have brain damage and you can't do anything but flip burgers, but you can cook the burgers perfectly every time due to some kind of autism, and work for very little money. This means that you have a high merit to mcdonalds, even though you have close to no worth to anyone else. This is also perfectly fine.
What is a valuable skill or asset is determined by your environment. Just like if you are fighting a bear, fire-starting skills are not helpful. If you need to establish a colony on Mars, knowing how to beat minecraft in 1 minute is not helpful.
Meritocracy is the fundamantal dogma of nature. It is the ultimate equality. Every single living thing in the universe is subject to the same set of laws, to the same phenomena of evolution and natural selection. Those who survive through any means are superior, and those who die are inferior. That superiority is merit. It is the least "subjective" thing I can think of. These sets of laws and phenomena are akin to a God, if you're religious. And it's beautiful :3
>>4594 It'a really cool idea don't get it wrong, but it won't work in the actual current world, maybe in the future...we need something now...
>>4596 This post is a mess...
>Unless you live in some sort of military dictatorship state-owned monopoly
I live in a first world country in Europe politicians promise all kind off stuff and then do what they want, they only focus on getting votes and neglect management, companies gets hacked and lose data all the time, they have contracts and terms of service that are unreadable and interpretable in every possible way to protect their ass, i could go on...
>Does it mean you cannot trust them? xD
It means you don't NEED to trust them you absolute brainlet, i don't need to trust the miner that mines the block on which my transaction is included, i don't need to trust who runs the nodes.
>fucks charging 200$ (or how much it was during 10000$ time)
That's completely false, i made a bitcoin transaction last week and it costed me 1$, you can also choose how much you want to pay, you pay more transaction is faster, you pay less is slower. https://bitcoinfees.info/ >Those are probably less popular, since running an infrastructure isn't free
A blockchain doesn't work like a server dude, depending on block size, on how you structure the nodes, on how the blockchain architecture is set up, you can vary efficiency a lot, look up the nano currency each account has a personal blockchain that gets merged in a master blockchain, computations are so small that are done inside the wallet at the client level. https://nano.org/en/about/ >you essentially propose a great centralization of money control, while being a pro-decentralization
I'm really not following you.
>fiat shines the best with a hard cash
Cash is based, but you can't send it easily on an international level.
>If you use it IRL, it's going to be connected to you pretty easily.
You can use how many addresses you want you know, there are also ways of anonimizing your bitcoin and even services to do so, i am not an expert though. But again you can use Monero if you really care about that.
>last paragraph
Are you really saying that morality is absolute and utility(merit) is subjective?
Cause it's the exact opposite.
What the actual fuck.
>Communism has its way in people's minds because that's how people used to live in small rural communities for thousands of years. Sharing is caring. xD
Noooope, in ancient times the stronger rules the tribe and at most the elders were kept in some consideration, actually it's the opposite ancient tribe were extremely meritocratic(although in a brutal way) the stronger persons(the most useful) were getting all the women, the best food, etc.
>>4598 >Communism kind of works...
Exactly.
>How useful you are to yourself is part of the determination of your merit. How useful you are to your country is part of the determination of your merit. How well your country can defeat other countries and/or defend itself is part of the determination of your country's merit.
This is exactly what was implied.
There is no universal kind of merit.
What you referring to is very much the Western civilization kind of merit BTW, and loosely defined, of course, just like with everything merit-ish. xD
>This is perfectly reasonable.
Yeah, well and also the manufacturer might play along. xP
>This is also perfectly fine.
Imaging driving merit from the place that exists solely because people are either too lazy or too retarded to cook their own food. Crazy, right? But you just did, pretty much yourself.
>What is a valuable skill or asset is determined by your environment.
I don't like this wordplay.
There are necessary things, and without them you're just stuck. Merit is different though. Merit is how much does it worth. If you don't want a colony on Mars, you're going to do whatever else. If you don't want to live, you'll continue the miserable existence instead of life you could be living, maybe. That's because your life has no merit to YOU. Other people might have a different opinion.
>Those who survive through any means are superior, and those who die are inferior. That superiority is merit.
That is actually subjective, since you put that merit into it yourself. You just defined that surviving means being superior, which is strictly unconventional as far as common evolution theory goes BTW. But even if you went along with the meaning, putting the merit into the adaptability would be subjective. There are other things to put merit into BTW, as far as nature laws are concerned.
The only community in which communism works is the family, and just cause of the strong connections formed by blood. All the rest is bullshit, even in a small village it wouldn't work.
>>4599 >I live in a first world country in Europe
Germany? xD
>politicians promise all kind off stuff and then do what they want,
Impeach them, shoot them, just do something.
>they only focus on getting votes and neglect management
The MERIT of being a politician is not actually a management, I think.
I mean, it's a nice bonus, but the actual merit of a politician is a controller, meaning a sly, machiavellian motherfucker who beats everybody to the chair. That's MERIT, that's UTILITY dude. xD
>companies gets hacked and lose data all the time, they have contracts and terms of service that are unreadable and interpretable in every possible way to protect their ass
With companies you just don't use them, and they go out of business.
>i don't need to trust the miner that mines the block on which my transaction is included, i don't need to trust who runs the nodes
…until somebody breaks the RSA cipher or whatever else happens to the blockchain, including the complete illegalization of the thing with hard crackdowns on everybody involved.
Dude, don't tell me about trust. I don't live in a vacuum where I can just crypto my problems away. I want to have actual people I can trust.
>That's completely false, i made a bitcoin transaction last week and it costed me 1$
Nah, I'm not talking about the present.
>A blockchain doesn't work like a server dude, depending on block size, on how you structure the nodes, on how the blockchain architecture is set up, you can vary efficiency a lot, look up the nano currency each account has a personal blockchain that gets merged in a master blockchain, computations are so small that are done inside the wallet at the client level.
All this is not free.
Neither the hardware, hard drives to store the blockchain, mining efforts to actually mine and confirm transactions, network infrastructure etc etc. Parties involved pay for this, and if you don't have some all-time centralization servers (as peers at least), your coin may just fall apart like with separate P2P swarms.
>I'm really not following you.
For example, bitcoin is spooky as fuck.
Every transaction ever is going to be in public forever, in a single blockchain, which is the only point to start looking at. Even the government doesn't have that much control over its currency and users of said currency.
>Cash is based, but you can't send it easily on an international level.
Is bitcoin easy? For using it directly as it was intended you have to download an entire blockchain, which is probably hundreds of gigabytes at this point. And you have to store it somewhere. Like, what the actual fuck?
>You can use how many addresses you want you know
Not impressed.
I also would have to exchange with people who change their wallets all the time. See? That shit ain't anonymous, and darkcoins probably won't be as popular, meaning I would have to resort to cash or something.
>Are you really saying that morality is absolute
There are rules that are not generally broken, yes. And merit can be bent as far as I demonstrated earlier with politicians. Politicians have to be in control. Like, maybe their sole merit is that masses trust them and don't revolt, while (((them))) actually rule.
>Noooope, in ancient times the stronger rules the tribe and at most the elders were kept in some consideration, actually it's the opposite ancient tribe were extremely meritocratic(although in a brutal way) the stronger persons(the most useful) were getting all the women, the best food, etc.
There were different ancient times. Like, do you even know about the Lost Heaven myth dude?
The merit of communism was mostly in the fact that you had to work together a lot in the fields or else you'd be fucked. With industrialization more private farming became so utterly dominant it doesn't make any sense to unite people on such grounds. I mean, still big industrial agroholdings would be more efficient, probably, but hey, maybe the new communism will be that everyone's gonna work in a big integrated corporations, like japs, a country with a strong commie traditions (that were, at least) BTW.
Also, about merit and coins…
Do they really have merit, like, outside of some probably reasonable online payments and fueling the black economy?
Like, let's be consistent here.
Money's value is in how they are essentially a fuel of economy and make complicated exchange chains very much real and straightforward as opposed to using just direct barter.
Now, what part of economy do coins fuel, exactly?
If you think they CAN fuel the world economy if they are adopted, well, let's think together.
The ability to subvert the blockchain with a single strike is a direct threat to a world economy, should we adopt coins on a world-scale.
The ability to steal coins forever by tricking the payer would probably be a nightmare even if we catch the criminal, like, can you even force the keys out of the criminal if he refuses to tell?
Maybe there are other issues with scaling that shit up to the actual world economy, but I'm kinda tired of thinking about this.
Oh yeah, one more thing, current people in power really should comply with the change, or else we're either going to have a crackdown or some sort of revolution, and revolutions in developed countries probably won't happen ever.
>>4591 (me)
>>4598 >Meritocracy is literally a flawless dogma
Except when it's not. Watch The Wire, please. This is perhaps the only show that changed my mind significantly about politics.
>>4602 >like japs, a country with a strong commie traditions
What? Japanese industry has very strict hierarchy.
>>4603 This already happens. Cryptocurrency, if nothing, helps with that by switching between obscure bank transactions from a open cryptographic protocol (in case of Cardano, for example, not "Libra").
we feel that perhaps exploring pilfering through shapeshift.io and uphold (formerly bitreserve) currency exchanging could help us get more money to anons and like-minded people. uphold is transparent about their finances so the ethics here would be to take only what is needed without harming the host; what is learned in the process is actually of value to them and worth that sort of money to them, or perhaps worth a lot more money. progressing from this could be heists of corrupt banking institutions and hijacking the rothchild's money supply which is at 500 trillion dollars supposedly. not hijacking all of it, that is probably not possible, a lot of it is in gold and silver and platinum and all that stuff and surely a completely ludicrous amount of assets. nevertheless their security is probably actually minimal because there is no need to protect all the dollars or whatever flowing out of their banking scheme, when they essentially print (literally and metaphorically) it infinitely as fast as they feel they can get away with. also counterfeiting should perhaps be considered, but i feel we should discuss the ethics of that as a group and think a lot about potential negative consequences of that for financially poor people. my intuition is that it would mostly help the poor if we maintain ourselves ethically, but i think intuition is not quite enough and ought to be unified with logic and rationality. also thanks anon for the nano link, i have felt computing efficiency to be an overlooked part of many crypto white papers; different tools for different jobs and all that, yet lightweight crypto is essential if crypto is to become more commonplace in forthcoming trading of goods and services. i feel if we can set up a means of paying people for fruity forest gardening and other such ecological regeneration nature will start to heal up human society faster. philanthropy can help greatly yet i feel pilfering is a part of this too because theft of the poor is rampant in the current financial paradigm; it's self-defense ethics, the key is to try to steal money back from the most-exploitative and only stealing from the somewhat-exploitative in emergencies, with one's own conscience being the judge and potential burden for each instance.
>>4609 >Except when it's not. Watch The Wire, please. This is perhaps the only show that changed my mind significantly about politics.
I've been watching this show for a while now and I don't see how it really disproves the appeal of meritocracy. I mean, sure, probably Baltimore wouldn't be saved by a truly meritocratic rule, and truly meritocratic lawyers and criminals probably do more harm than anything, but this show mostly displays how hard it is to do the right thing in a democratic system, not meritocratic one. Oh, and also it kinda displays that people's motives to do stuff of "merit" might be rather selfish and that means essentially that the game is much more complex than just putting competent people in respective places, but that's like very subtle and not evident in the show at all. Mostly it just shows how Baltimore is rotten to the core and how desirable, if anything, meritocracy is to a commoner in that town, not something else.
What's your comment?
>>5260 >What's your comment?
I don't want to spoil the show. But, on the fourth season there's a kid on the school. He is very smart, much more than the others, but some things happen to him. The last episode from the season 4 broke me a little.
If you give me permission to spoil or if you've already watched the whole show, them just say to me and I can argument...
crypto = orwell
all transactions are publicly available on the blockchain
it's not anonymous
unstable, prices rising or dropping at unimaginable level
controlled by who?
>>5287 generalizing, some crypto are truly anonymous like XMR(Monero)
there is not your name on the blockchain, while there is on your bank account, so it is actually more private, with splitting techniques you can make money disappear even on a public blockchain
there are decentralized stablecoins like DAI, prices are unstable only if you compare crypto to fiat(which is based on a completely different economy), crypto to crypto prices are more stable
blockchain is controlled in a decentralized way by miners with POW and validators with POS, can't even compare with FIAT currenciaes that are literally controlled by a central bank
in short it is way better than what we have, facebook is orwell not cryptos
Another interesting point about crypto is that they seem to be a Ponzi.
Like, the only way coins got public attention and investment attention seems to be via constant shilling so jews can pump&dump the coin when it's still hyped.
One more time, slowly - since the only way to attract investment seems to be shilling and hype pumping, it really doesn't look well.
You can see some new random shitcoin shilled everywhere and a lot of coins are released with a bunch of shit pre-mined, and it's not the only scheme here. Pump&dump obviously is more generic.
We can see GPU prices going up as a consequence, but we have yet to see people adopting it on a wide scale.
Maybe it's not 1984, but it's Brave New World indeed. Like, I feel like the only reason why states&banks might be scared is because if that shit acquires huge capitalization it might just crash some significant market or maybe the world economy, who the fuck knows. I mean, people already rent datacenters to mine that shit, this is honestly mind-boggling.
>>5290 >generalizing, some crypto are truly anonymous like XMR(Monero)
Good luck getting it anonymously, it's up to impossible not to leave trace.
>there is not your name on the blockchain
IP address can be associated if you're not careful. If you download whole blockchain then I guess it's not anonymous?
>there are decentralized stablecoins like DAI, prices are unstable only if you compare crypto to fiat
So there's literally who operating it.
>crypto to crypto prices are more stable
If one crypto jumps, then other follow.
>in short it is way better than what we have
Regular money doesn't leave traces, is used by lots of people but isn't virtual and can't be used online. I guess I will wait one will be able to safely buy crypto.
>>5262 I've finished the 4th season and I still don't see your point. Well, don't see it beyond what I've already said.
Anyway, who are you talking about? Dukie? Michael? Randy? Since you're talking about "smart", it's probably Dukie or Randy, but I don't see what meritocratic avenues are at fault here. Prezbo and Carver showing some kindness are not really tied into any meritocracy. Like, the only thing that is strongly meritocratic there was that segregation program that actually had some RESULTS.
The other, completely unrelated, would be that rash political decision by the new mayor Carcetti. Like, it's good at heart and probably could show some results long-term, but there is too many "buts" to it.
Anyway just give me the elaborate answer on the 4 seasons span regarding this quote by you (supposedly)
>Except when it's not. Watch The Wire, please. This is perhaps the only show that changed my mind significantly about politics.
Here you try to make a point that the Wire disproves that meritocracy is good. Now, we don't want to go into the detail on whether it's good or not, we want to know how the Wire (TV criminal drama) shows it. I might have left something missing, since it's a thick show and it's kinda hard to keep track of everything while doing analysis like this at the same time. So I'm waiting for your point to be delivered.
The jew needs two things for ultimate control over our lives:
1. ID of each and everyone using biometric data of every kind. In this way, you will be identified everywhere you go. E-card, e-ticket, e-payments and so on.
2. A world-wide, centrally controlled electronic system of transactions, so that you won't actually own any money. If (((they))) decide, (((they))) will be able to withdraw all money from your account, limit your payments and so on.
Which is why we must resist both plans, avoid getting identified and prefer cash.
>another cryptocoin, but made by cybercommunists
who cares? they'll probably make it illegal to not have a single wallet tied to your gov id, then make it so only cops and shit can see your transactions (assuming that's even implementable)
>>5295 >>there is not your name on the blockchain
>IP address can be associated if you're not careful. If you download whole blockchain then I guess it's not anonymous?
false and false. all you need to do is run it over Tor, which I do. the only real problem is anonymously _spending_ the money. you gotta launder it n sheeit
>Regular money doesn't leave traces, is used by lots of people but isn't virtual and can't be used online. I guess I will wait one will be able to safely buy crypto.
no, real money has serial numbers and embeds more watermarks, has your fingerprint, is covered in feces, and there's not actually any way to verify it's real.
t. used cash all my life and continue to use it
>>5981 It would be awesome if payment gateways for Libra supported other cryptocurrency. That way you have a huge company pushing to normalize cryptocurrency and you can use an actually decentralized cryptocurrency. Technically, Libra is decentralized, but operators of nodes in the network are limited to members of the Libra Alliance instead of anyone who wants to.
>>5984 >there's not actually any way to verify it's real.
>money
>real
WTF am I listening to here? As long as people accept it as the means exchange of labor/goods/whatever, it's as real as money gets. Other than that, nobody fucking cares about your cracked hashes or whatever shit you come up with.
>>5996 >why even work?
Yup, all those cryptocoin shills (not in general, but shilling some particular coins for whatever bullshit reasons) doing exactly that. TBH I struggle to see the value they add to the system.
>>5999 what fucking system? the communist system? they're literally no different than stock traders. and businessmen in general for that matter. just background noise
>>5978 I was talking specifically about Dukie, the school boy. Meritocracy implies that, if you do better than the others (merit) you'll be rewarded. That's actually the opposite that happens in some cases.
The character Dukie is much smarter kid than anyone in the class. Yet he ends up as a addicted like every street boy.
Meritocracy is not fair, because merit is not quantified as a mathematical equation. And even if it was, humans will always let other emotions take control, such as envy.
The Dukie case is only one example. 'The Wire' shows over and over again these things happening, like a cyclic pattern, to prove many points. This is probably the best show I've watched yet.
How did you liked it?
>>6175 >Meritocracy implies that, if you do better than the others (merit) you'll be rewarded
Well, Baltimore isn't exactly the meritocratic utopia, if you wanted to make a point.
>Meritocracy is not fair, because merit is not quantified as a mathematical equation.
That's true, and any meritocratic system will struggle in defining and evaluating merit, because it's supposed to be reliant on the system, not the people.
Not that your example shows that. The Wire kinda shows that by making good things happen mostly without the help of the system. Or rather, that somebody has to control the system and take the initiative. And somebody has to watch the watchers. And watcher watchers. And so on.
Well, as long as it's that what you had in mind, we're in agreement. Not that I really disagreed, I just wanted to clarify your point.
>How did you liked it?
I like how realistic it is. Maybe some of the characters are too refined, meaning they are clearly like that for show, but enough of them are rather mixed up, so they're believable. The situations described in the show are also believable enough. Not that I would know how the legal system and the criminal world work in the US, but generally everything that matters is believable.
>>6177 >Well, Baltimore isn't exactly the meritocratic utopia
Yeah. But you wouldn't be able to apply meritocracy on places like these. Because of corruption and poverty. Or any place, really, because corruption will always happen and poverty too.
I guess you could apply a model based on meritocracy on places like Norway or Iceland, but you'll have to create machanisms to prevent some stuff that were shown on The Wire.
>The Wire kinda shows that by making good things happen mostly without the help of the system.
Yes. Actually the system is so bad that they have to cheat on it to be able to make something good. Like McNulty going against the chain of command or faking a serial killer.
>And watcher watchers. And so on.
A infinite-regress of chaos.
>Well, as long as it's that what you had in mind, we're in agreement.
It is what I had in mind.
>>6191 It is definitely not too late to make money from cryptocurrencies, my advice though is to invest only what you can afford to lose, we are talking about high risk investments.
Get some BTC and ETH as a baseline, then some anon coins like XMR, you can also try some more experimental(but good IMO) coins like MKR, NANO and RLC. This is pretty much what i'm invested in, good luck fren.
>>6197 The stock situation is interesting right now, between the federal reserve stuff and the trade war with china future is really unpredictable, stay away for now and buy only after it crashes more, i wish i was not already invested in some markets.
This is a good moment to invest in gold and crypto.
>>6197 >Trying to compare stocks where there are strict regulations and even an entire field of study dedicated to shitcoins where most of them can't even write a proper White paper
Holy shit you're fucking retarded
Crytos and precious metals are what people need to get into now. We're in a recession. The sheeple don't know it yet. The (((Federal Reserve))) already cut interest rate this month by a tiny bit and most likely will cut it again (by a larger amount) next month. They're applying band aids until the next election---then they'll announce, oy vey goyim, we need to bailout (((certain industries))). Now is the time to save yourselves, your retirement(IRAs) and investments.
>>6206 >precious metals
Good luck with that. China has ~80% of these metals and the trade war is getting worse every day. The USA should make a deal with Brazil on that matter.
>cryptos
Not a solution for economy. Dollar is the most used coin already. As much as I like coins like Cardano, I don't see much advantage of cryptocoins in saving the economy.
>>6208 I'm not the nanon you are replying to but there is an important difference between "precious metals" and "rare-earth metals".
What >>6206 meant with precious metals are gold, silver and platinum which are considered "safe assets" to invest during a recession, these are also called store of value, Bitcoin is also a store of value similar to gold cause there is limited number of bitcoin the same as there is a limited amount of gold on planet Earth.
>Not a solution for economy. Dollar is the most used coin already.
A century ago the british pound was the most used coin in the world, and before the british pound was the spanish dollar, the world currency change all the times, the dollar is ready to fall IMO, next world currency is either Bitcoin or the Renminbi, China already started the process since a while.
>>6208 >Not a solution for economy
???
Crytos aren't going to save the economy but they can act as a hedge(albeit not a good one because of their volatility) when stock prices tank and people's portfolio values are nearly wiped out. Precious metals(actual physical stuff not the paper shit jews sell--ETF???(I forgot what jews call them) as anon in >>6210 explained are better stores of wealth.
>>6205 uhhh i don't know why it wasn't obvious, but my analogy was meant to explain that gambling on stocks and gambling on bitcoin are both just gambling.
also lol while bitcoin is indeed mostly script kiddies, your precious "white papers" are mostly shit too
>>6231 >STILL trying to compare stocks where there are strict regulations and even an entire field of study dedicated to shitcoins where most of them can't even write a proper White paper
>The social networking giant has linked with 28 partners including Mastercard, PayPal and Uber to form Libra Association, a Geneva-based entity governing the new digital coin
>To facilitate transactions, Facebook also created Calibra, a subsidiary that will offer digital wallets to save, send and spend Libras. Calibra will be connected to Facebook messaging platforms Messenger and WhatsApp.
>The whole system is scheduled to launch in the first half of 2020.
>The name "Libra" comes from Roman weight measurements, the astrological sign for justice and the French word for freedom, said David Marcus, who heads the project for Facebook.
>French word for "freedom"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-crypto/facebook-reveals-libra-cryptocurrency-sparking-new-privacy-concerns-idUSKCN1TJ0TN