Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:31:10 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 01:40:37 PM

So if you Cross China, India (shutting down BTC), EU, USA taking over btc infrastructure, what is left? Sealand? sure the rest of the world can withstand a 51% attack.

Who the hell would spend billions on a 51% attack, and what the hell do they expect to get out of it? 51% attack doesn't automatically destroy bitcoin. At best, it lets the attacker double-spend. It doesn't change the rules of the network, since those are maintained by miners and wallets, and it doesn't even block transactions fromm going through, as there is a very easy fix for that.

It will be war dammit, your blockchain against ours.

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:31:10 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 01:40:37 PM

USA and EU would propably rather shutdown Internet than lose control over Euro or Dollar.

That would be pretty fun to watch, as every single citizen in the country protests to the point where the politicians who did that are literally dragged out of their government buildings and shot. Though I doubt it would ever come to this, since politicians know they need votes to keep their office, and would rather get anonymous bitcoin donations than vote for laws to shut down the internet.

Well do you expect their citizens watch their hard earned assets vaporized so bitcoin whales come to scoop them up, and not demand their Gs to fence-double-firewall their net and if that fails to shutit down?

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:44:20 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 04:36:34 PM

The only way for a merchant to stay in bussiness is to offload the risk to ... B) producer to delay payment until sold.

This results in a regression of risk down the chain of producers, but the risk is ultimately taken on by the bank.
The initial money has to come from somewhere. In inflationary currency, the cash starts with the bank, and goes

Bank -> Producer A -> Producer B -> Merchant

then on the way back, the cash flows

Customer -> Merchant -> Producer B -> Producer A -> Bank

Point is, cash has to come from somewhere, and the bank is the risk taker, despite the final link in the chain, the Merchant, being where all the risk is. If the merchant fails to sell, everyone up the chain loses, too. In a deflationary system, instead of buying and holding inventory, and paying back for it after it sells, likely the bank will be funding the merchant, and the cash will go

Bank -> Merchant -> Producer B -> Producer A

then when product is sold, it will go

Customer -> Merchant -> Bank

This way, the bank knows exactly where it is placing its risk, and none of the producers up the line are at risk or depend on the merchant selling, since they get their cash upfront. Chances are, the merchant and the bank will be the same, or rather the merchant will be operating on savings instead of on debt.

In bitcoin there is no Bank hence merchant opperates on savings which translate to goods that depreciate both against bitcoin as well as against "errosion" so why a merchant to even bother stock up? So the risk is eventually offloaded to either consumer or producer.
The producer will have to invest savings to equipment, assets, and general means of productions that depreciate, have to deal with merchands that promise to pay when and if they sell, takes all the risk of faults cause none will insure him, so why bother? He will wait for preorders and possible advance payments and only them begin producing. So the consumer will have to preorder/prepay goods at execive prices in his view and wait unknown time until delivery, so he will buy only what he absolutely needs: byebye to consumerism?
Hell Im in, if only I wasn't that brainwashed to need all the shit that are on TV

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:44:20 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 04:36:34 PM

I am talking on experience here. I live in F*** Greece, we are deflating for 4 years now.

The euro is not deflationary, so that's bullshit. Greece problem is not deflation, it's excessive borrowing.

Right now within greece the functional problem is deflation. Borrowing is the kludge.

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:44:20 PM

Quote from: kisa2005 on January 06, 2014, 07:49:05 PM

And, indeed, if significant part of early adopters recognizes their ethical obligation to support philantropic causes...

Kisa, can you explain the ethics behind that statement?

guilt?

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:56:58 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 09:40:13 PM

Quote from: thoughtfan on January 06, 2014, 08:56:01 PM

That being said, are you seriously suggesting the local 'deflation' you are experiencing is the cause of the problems? When an economy is as crippled as Greece's I can understand why citizens would be crying out for their Central Bank (if you still had one) to be inflating your currency. However, there are some who do not believe this is anything other than a 'sticking plaster' solution which provides temporary alleviation at the expense of savers.

Savers? tell that to the Cypriots....

Did the confiscation of wealth in Cyprus from the savers make Cypriots better off? Cause op was saying at the expense of, and you seem to be disagreeing with something...

Yes because the cypriots were *NOT* alleviated and *yet* the savers were fukced

Quote from: Rassah on January 06, 2014, 09:56:58 PM

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 09:40:13 PM

It's not a sticking plaster, it's just a stronger pedal that keeps you on the bicycle when it gets steeper, you only fall when you stop.
Besides It's not only Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy they feel the burn too and soon the north, Greece was just the canary in the mines, the crisis origins lie with the Euro as a construct.

It's not the euro, it's deficit spending. You have two options: keep spending more than you take in, inflating currency, and continue until you hit hyperinflation and currency collapse, OR keep spending more than you take in, but have no methods of inflating currency, and hit a wall at which you can't spend any more, causing social program collapse. Or you could maybe not keep spending more than you take in. I think spending more than you take in is the problem here. The only difference between Greece that can't print its currency, and other countries that can, is how high of a bubble they can inflate before they explode.

It was the euro that enabled the mercantilistic? attack on the south, just as bitcoin will create opportunities for new mercantilistic policies globaly, and that *never* ended in War.

Quote from: thaaanos on January 06, 2014, 09:40:13 PM

In bitcoin it can be worse because a critical parameter is hardcoded with no hope of change, a single person no matter how smart made a decission for millions, that's what ires me in Bitcoin. And I ask you that, would you do it? would you made *any* decision that could affect millions based only in your judgement?

If I knew it was the right decision, sure, why not?
[/quote]

gee right any decision you ever make at any point is right (for that time only)