Is it in a good way, or do I need to stop...cause I will..

I wanna hear your theory about 'What bitcoin really Is.'

I want you to hear it too, because not many can understand, they don't say things like you do, but you aren't listening yet:

You think it's the future world reserve currency?

I'm just explaining to you what I read in John Nash's Ideal Money about how and international e-currency with a stable supply is going to force the hand of central banks to print money with an asymptotically stable value.

You keep bringing up Satoshi but he's not a real person. Eventually you have to admit you are seeing something new.

man, I just came from the bar after a few drinks and couldn't help to label DODN as my uncle. it was me spitting facts and questioning him about a subtopic, completely unrelated to bitcoin, and then his rebuttal was, yep ur a "know it all" or it was him looking the other way in disgust.

DODN, I think people are embracing bitcoin. It may have started out as a cult and religion and it sure as still ****s maybe, but let me say this with certainty, it is snowballing. If you are questioning the authenticity of BTC u better be questioning the authenticity of every coin that has followed. Is it really "Allah Akman," "o ya, Satoshi, I will blow you," or is there actually something there?

something has gotten it to 8k, once 20k. as stupid and undetailed as this may sound, how doesn't some kind of global currency make sense? we are all people, we need something to center around, and money seems to be pretty much the most important anymore, something needs to be dumbed down and make sense, BTC just may be it.

edit: our whole world is ****ed in so many ways anyway. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the fact how gold has value. Like, I could have 80 t bone steaks(i dunno pry more??), or an ounce of gold. I'll take the gold? da ****?? digital currency?? paper wallet?? nano ledger s?? give me the tbone steaks

don't derail this p2 dog p2...we are having a dialog about how a very old man said something very interesting...well before satoshi came on the scene...

edit: but I agree "allah akman "o ya, satoshi..." wtf? ;p

edit: you weren't derailing, i read your post wrong!

So is this an appeal to authority now? Is John Nash the prophet Isaiah, announcing the future coming of our Lord and Savior Nakamoto? Why would an e currency with a stable supply force banks to print more valuable money? What is valuable money? Why would valuable money help? What problems would it solve?

Exactly fityfmi...

See, Nash reasoned that at times when we were actually on a REAL gold standard (like when Newton pegged the british pound to gold in 1717) we had favorable economic times. But the problem is it is too singular. If an entity controlled the supply of gold or if technology changed dramatically then this would be unfavorable for such a peg. Then he thought about the possibility of using an international array of commodity prices, which could be arranged to be suitable. It is often thought (George Selgin made this mistake in dialogue with me) that Nash's proposal was for all nations to peg their currencies to such a basket.

But there is a political problem, because some commodities fall out of flavor (or into flavor) and so the basket would need to be adjusted, and this brings in the political component such a standard seeks to remove in the first place:

His proposal doesn't actual call for an ICPI (international commodity price index), he concieved that it could be done without it:

It was just that this theoretical notion gave him the idea for the ultimately launched concept of (asymptotically) Ideal Money:

Bitcoin fulfills the necessary apolitical consideration that such an array of prices seeks to provide. Moreover, it addresses the necessity of a mechanism for regular adjustment, while avoiding the introduction of a political component.

This political component is avoided by the novelty of Bitcoin’s difficulty adjustment algorithm explained in the following quote from Satoshi:

The expected value of the instantaneous production and consumption of block header candidates is a price discovery of the costs required to produce a Bitcoin. This, in conjunction with the decentralized nature of mining, suggests a Bitcoin standard can serve as a perfect international basis for value stabilization not unlike gold standards observed in favorable economic times in our history.

You are asking questions, but you aren't listening. We need you to admit, you are seeing something NEW, otherwise you are just disingenuous.

The teasing was not necessary but this Nash stuff is new to me thanks for elaborating. I need to read about this I'll address your posts in further detail once I get familiarized with the material.

All this seems to rest on the assumption that the gold standard was responsible for prosperity, correct?

Right on. Yes the gold standard is well touted, but it has limitations, technology could make gold not very scarce. And the bretton woods was a de facto gold standard which still had a political content. We can also look at WHY the gold standard was auspicious. It is interesting to note though that is was Newton that reasoned Britain to be on it.

edit: you teased me more

btw, I'm the expert on Ideal Money and everyone knows it.

edit2: and thank you, it takes someone with a special wit and knowledge to open the dialogue.

Ok so I guess the most natural question is: why bitcoin? Why not some other alt or G20Coin? I'll let you answer that one and I'll get to reading. Probably won't be around for a bit. I can almost hear the ultrabulls sighing in collective relief....

To highlight your awful "say anything to make a point" posting style, you leave with the implication that only "ultrabulls" will be relieved. Take you time.

Newton had a lot of bat**** crazy ideas, not sure I would cite him as an authority on anything outside the realm of physics.

Tech world it’s called network effects. It’s hard to overcome. The pipeline has lots of features to improve itself in development and already in testing as well to set it more apart again. Layer 2 solutions like lightning network. More features that let you have more privacy with transfers. To be exponentially better is tough. Especially in the network security sphere. When governments are constantly trying to take down the biggest one I would imagine like you point out.

It’s like being in the usa and asking why people use Uber over lyft or other taxi apps that were given time during city bans to try to compete. Why Facebook? Why google?

G20 coin would be interesting and I doubt happening anytime soon but at the end of the day it’s still centralized. Probably a security nightmare What happens during times of war?? All bets are off? again your putting all your trust into governments to stay true to their agreements. Which historically has a terrible track record. First look at the super powers usa and rising China. Usa will kick the can down the road as long as they could to keep the system they designed in place running as the worlds major reserve currency that benefits them the most and all the global financial arrchitecture they put into place behind it. All the top institutions for example are US designed. When China comes closer to making the rules of the global financial architecture perhaps. As I doubt the usa wants anything to do with gold again, while the eastern world loves gold to some degree.

I’m here to learn and constantly changing my mind as I learn more. I love smart people who post in here who are bearish and share their thoughts. Healthy debate is always good. I’m always willing to change my mind and want to actually debate the strongest points any bear has. I think that’s where the best discussion happens and you really learn something.

Bitcoin doesn't save you from hyperinflation. You would have had to change your money from the local currency into bitcoin before it hyper-inflated, in which case, you could have changed it into dollars or gold or any other currency/commodity. Changing it from the local currency to bitcoin makes it harder, not easier, compared with having changed it into dollars. Just another lie.

That's one of the strong reasons. There's also the fact that it's designed to withstand attacks from regulating forces, as opposed generate profit for the founders (like most "competing" cryptocurrencies).

It's stronger than that. Those companies can be targeted at the head of the snake, and coerced to change their behaviour. A decentralized, distributed system like Bitcoin is censorship resistant by its very nature.

Perhaps an official "world currency" could be constructed in such a way that it could work. In that case it would be in demand just like national currencies would be otherwise. What Nooseknot is saying, is that that wouldn't matter, in regards to Bitcoin's role in that system. It would still exist alongside the fiat currencies, acting like a regulating force on the inflation rate.

This Nash stuff is actually quite intriguing. I have some problems with it but it's quite compelling.

I think it's funny to see some guys answering questions I had for you with the same exact canned responses you can find on /r/btc. They don't even understand what you're talking about. Do you have any evidence that Satoshi was thinking of this ideal money concept when he invented bitcoin?

I'll be back in a day or two to carry on the discussion.

BTC has the first mover advantage and I'd say these are better comparisons (if I had to stick to your business ideas) than the ones you used for BTC: a taxi, MySpace and W3catalog.

Yes you understand the concept. It really is quite compelling. I need to dive deeper into this. Do you have any evidence that Satoshi had this in mind when he invented it? FWIW I do not believe the network effect is a strong argument for longevity, despite the fact that it exists now.

Comparing to a taxi would be fair if bitcoin was actively trying to ban other cryptos rather working to improve its network.

MySpace could be a fair comparison, but I'm more inclined to think bitcoin is more like the internet and ethereum is the MySpace of the smart contract/ICO space. (No, I don't think it's a flawless analogy)

Ok, I like where you are going to try to find a better comparsion. let's try to strengthen this though to compare it to something more in it's field.

we are comparing it to first mover advantages in businesses. since bitcoin isn't a business/company but a protocol. Let's compare it to first mover advantages in that space which I think might be even more sticky. Like the email protocol for example.