Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 31 results by elchelito
I'm what most of you would consider a wall street person: I'm a high frequency trader, have been for the past decade, and make my income solely from trading.
I own ~4 bitcoins that I mined myself a couple years back just because I thought/think the bitcoin project is cool.
I'd like to buy many, many more bitcoins (to buy and hold, not to HFT). Putting a few hundred thousand dollars into an investment like bitcoin would be something I'd be happy to do - the risk adjusted returns are within my risk profile. I haven't. The reason is I don't trust any of the exchanges. Even the 'reputable' ones are still small/unproven startups. Coming from the wall street world, there's a lot to be said for the security that larger battle-tested financial institutions offer. When you're talking about putting hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars at risk, counterparty risk is a very real concern. At this point in time, no exchange has given me enough faith to trust them with my money, even if it was only for a single hour where I wired it to them and then bought the BTC and transferred the BTC out immediately. While I never would have used gox, just as an example: What if the company happens to blow up in that hour, and I never get my BTC and my USD are stuck in some sketchy small company that is in a foreign bankruptcy proceeding for the next three years?
Wall street types are happy to accept financial risk, but aren't very fond of counterparty risk, especially if we can't hedge it off onto someone else. At the moment that's not particularly possible. If you got even a single reputable financial institution (bank, equity/commodity exchange, something of that nature) to operate a BTC exchange, we'd come flocking.
All of the "fear of the unknown" type comments aren't particularly accurate about why wall street isn't investing bigtime in BTC yet. Wall Street will invest in pretty much any asset as long as the asset provides appropriate levels of risk adjusted returns -- certain assets are clearly far more risky, however, if the returns are sufficient for that level of risk, and that type of investor is able to stomach that risk, they'll happily invest. Imho, BTC has a track record long enough at this point with returns high enough to make it an interesting risky investment for many many institutional investors -- aka, the returns aren't the problem. For example, ask anyone who trades long-dated far-out-of-the-money options how they feel about risky investments. In my opinion, the reliable, safe infrastructure simply isn't there yet to get institutional investors to feel comfortable trading BTC -- it's too much the wild west, with small fly-by-night companies (gox, btc-e, etc) having large market share in the exchange markets.
Just my $0.02.
I own ~4 bitcoins that I mined myself a couple years back just because I thought/think the bitcoin project is cool.
I'd like to buy many, many more bitcoins (to buy and hold, not to HFT). Putting a few hundred thousand dollars into an investment like bitcoin would be something I'd be happy to do - the risk adjusted returns are within my risk profile. I haven't. The reason is I don't trust any of the exchanges. Even the 'reputable' ones are still small/unproven startups. Coming from the wall street world, there's a lot to be said for the security that larger battle-tested financial institutions offer. When you're talking about putting hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars at risk, counterparty risk is a very real concern. At this point in time, no exchange has given me enough faith to trust them with my money, even if it was only for a single hour where I wired it to them and then bought the BTC and transferred the BTC out immediately. While I never would have used gox, just as an example: What if the company happens to blow up in that hour, and I never get my BTC and my USD are stuck in some sketchy small company that is in a foreign bankruptcy proceeding for the next three years?
Wall street types are happy to accept financial risk, but aren't very fond of counterparty risk, especially if we can't hedge it off onto someone else. At the moment that's not particularly possible. If you got even a single reputable financial institution (bank, equity/commodity exchange, something of that nature) to operate a BTC exchange, we'd come flocking.
All of the "fear of the unknown" type comments aren't particularly accurate about why wall street isn't investing bigtime in BTC yet. Wall Street will invest in pretty much any asset as long as the asset provides appropriate levels of risk adjusted returns -- certain assets are clearly far more risky, however, if the returns are sufficient for that level of risk, and that type of investor is able to stomach that risk, they'll happily invest. Imho, BTC has a track record long enough at this point with returns high enough to make it an interesting risky investment for many many institutional investors -- aka, the returns aren't the problem. For example, ask anyone who trades long-dated far-out-of-the-money options how they feel about risky investments. In my opinion, the reliable, safe infrastructure simply isn't there yet to get institutional investors to feel comfortable trading BTC -- it's too much the wild west, with small fly-by-night companies (gox, btc-e, etc) having large market share in the exchange markets.
Just my $0.02.
go to bitcoin.de.
It's backed by a bank that is a daughter to a very big german bank. BTC supply there isn't endless but you could take your time to buy up coins...
yes they have an english version.
However, when you want to enforce your own convictions on other people, that is where the true issue lays.
No I wouldn't want to force anything onto people. When did I say that?
These are, after all, just hypothetical thoughts right? If you don't feel the same way it's still all good. Greed is the dominating instinct in our society and the reason capitalism is so "successful". Nobody wants to share. Because it is their right not to as you say.
Brain hurts. Lets apply the same logic to countries that we apply to people. - No country can have an excessively greater amount of wealth (assets, cash, property, etc) then others.
Yes that would be a good start. Let's just stop exploiting the third world and shitting on them but share some of our wealth.
What's countries anyway, we're all humans on a little planet. But we divide it up into small sections to then say that the guys in the one section can't share their stuff with the guys in the other section. Because of what again?
People tend to get very irritated by these ideas as i said, might even cause brainache.
So, ready to ship out your computer and a fair share of your material possessions to other countries where they are not as abundant?
already did.
yes that actually solved the problem.
i ended up cancelling that order and making my own powered risers out of normal risers like this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=76121.0
way cheaper.
on my rig everything is running on the same 1600w PSU but if you have two PSUs it doesn't really matter what's where. Think of it like a power plug, it doesn't care what's connected to it. Just don't put too much on one...
i ended up cancelling that order and making my own powered risers out of normal risers like this: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=76121.0
way cheaper.
on my rig everything is running on the same 1600w PSU but if you have two PSUs it doesn't really matter what's where. Think of it like a power plug, it doesn't care what's connected to it. Just don't put too much on one...
yes great idea. i was thinking about something similar. it should be possible somehow to come up with a technology that ensures that everybody has just one wallet or bank account or whatever.
in another thread i proposed the idea of an upper limit on how much a single person can own. people will shout at you for mentioning something like that but it would indeed be fair. There is no sense in one person owning 50 billion USD (Bill Gates).
Also there should be demurrage so that hoarding does not pay off. interest just guarantees that the gap between rich and poor gets bigger and bigger. quite stupid.
in another thread i proposed the idea of an upper limit on how much a single person can own. people will shout at you for mentioning something like that but it would indeed be fair. There is no sense in one person owning 50 billion USD (Bill Gates).
Also there should be demurrage so that hoarding does not pay off. interest just guarantees that the gap between rich and poor gets bigger and bigger. quite stupid.
That 5 million is just some number. Could be 20 million or 200 as well.
But eventually there is a point where it doesn't make sense for an individual to own more money. So people start wasting it on huge car collections, five houses etc...
Of course the very rich people are not gonna agree with it because people care most about themselves, that's our nature.
But I am talking about democracy and the few rich people wouldn't have much say in that i guess...
But eventually there is a point where it doesn't make sense for an individual to own more money. So people start wasting it on huge car collections, five houses etc...
Of course the very rich people are not gonna agree with it because people care most about themselves, that's our nature.
But I am talking about democracy and the few rich people wouldn't have much say in that i guess...
Actually it doesn't. You see, kiddo, when you put your money in the bank, the bank doesn't just keep your money in a vault. They loan your money out to other people, and these people pay interest on these loans, and the bank passes on some of this interest to you, and keeps the rest for itself as profit. That's how banks make money, and it's how you make money if you put your money in the bank.
Well yes thats how it works but that doesn't change the fact that a lot money automatically becomes a lot more money. So the gap between rich and poor can only get bigger and bigger.
Well, what does it mean to have a negative balance in the first place? It means you've spent more money than you actually own. But how can you spend money if you don't own it? The answer is that you borrow money from the bank. Now, the bank can't just give you this money for free (they're not a charity, after all), instead they have to charge you interest for it. This interest is the price you have to pay for spending money that doesn't belong to you. Do you understand now, kiddo?
The whole system of interest and debt needs to go.
But what will people do when they want to spend more money than they have at the moment? How will people buy homes if nobody will provide mortgages? How will people get an education without student loans?First of all education has to be free. No student loans. For the other stuff imagine a monetary system with built in demurrage that kicks in when you hold your money. So lets say I want to build a house and you have 1000 spare dollars. If you keep them under your pillow they will lose value. If you give them to me and I build a house I'll have to give you back 1000 in a year. That saves you from losing money and enables me to build my house. It also boosts the economy because people don't hoard money but invest it.
Let's say a factory costs more than 5 million dollars. Who will built it if nobody owns more money that that? Who will sell a factory if they can't get more than 5 million for it? If there are 100 people working at a factory for $50,000 per year, who will pay their salaries? What will the consumers buy if the factory can't make and sell more than 5 million dollars worth of product? Clearly, businesses have a very real need to own gazillions of dollars, and employees and consumers have a very real need for businesses.
Yes businesses. But businesses don't have to be owned by one person. Businesses should partly belong to all the people who work there. And to the investors of course. That gives motivation and identification to the employees. The bitcoin protocol could be very helpful in that.
I could go and issue a new coin, let's call it Facebook coin. In the initial phase I give away and sell coins to people. With the money I now have I found a company called Facebook. It belongs to all the people who own coins now. Much like a combination of stock market and crowd funding.
I know this limit of personal ownership is hard to pull off in reality because greed is the prevailing motivation for people.
Sorry, I didn't realise half of the world could eat money. That changes everything. 
You do realize that you don't have to eat your money right? You can buy stuff for it like food, water filtration systems, start micro economies, educate people and so on...
Re: I can nearly pinpoint when American Capitalism started to die
Nobody cares how many hours you work. The only thing that matters is what you produced from your work. It is absolutely fair for someone to earn 20 million a year and someone else 20 thousands if the first guy is a thousand times as productive, or what he produces is a thousand times as valuable.
So you think the top banksters who have been bailed out recently are very productive? You are right that there can be such a measure but shouldn't it be in what they did for society?
The US president earns something like 500k dollars a year right? That's legit because he has so much responsibility compared to the average worker. But how does that compare to a manager earning 20 million?
Re: Anyone giving out Bitcoin as a Christmas gift this year?
I am giving each of my cousins two LTC.
Printed out paper wallets and folded them into a picture frame. On the front you see the public key and the QR code for it.
But you have to take apart the frame to get to the private key.
I think it's fun, they can put it somewhere and check the price from time to time...
Printed out paper wallets and folded them into a picture frame. On the front you see the public key and the QR code for it.
But you have to take apart the frame to get to the private key.
I think it's fun, they can put it somewhere and check the price from time to time...
Re: I can nearly pinpoint when American Capitalism started to die
and you believe that everyone should get the same amount of pay pased on the job position, regardless of how hard they work or how difficult their job is, then you should be for Communism.
I don't think that would be very fair. But it's also not fair for someone to earn 20 million a year and the other guy 20 k. He couldn't possibly work that many more hours...
Let us assume that our "Utopia " from Bitcoin as the dominant currency becomes reality .
Most here say Bitcoin is liberal. Is it really liberal ? The majority decides (51%), so it is democratic. Would it be liberal, the richest would decide .
Now, if Bitcoin is predominant currency that will unfortunately have changed little in the world. The Rothschilds and the likes are out of the game , yet we would probably have a situation again where at the end 5% of the people own 95% of the Bitcoins .
Now only theoreticly , without considering the technical feasibility:
What if now the majority decides that every individual can have only one Bitcoinwallet ? Now what if the majority further decides that each wallet can only contain a certain number of Bitcoins , and all the wallets exceeding this maximum, automaticly distribute the surplus evenly to all wallets?
The majority would benefit , so why should the majority not decide for it?
This is just a hypothesis which ignores any technical consideration.
(i know this is probably a very unpopular post for liberals; try to be kind please)
Thoughts?
Most here say Bitcoin is liberal. Is it really liberal ? The majority decides (51%), so it is democratic. Would it be liberal, the richest would decide .
Now, if Bitcoin is predominant currency that will unfortunately have changed little in the world. The Rothschilds and the likes are out of the game , yet we would probably have a situation again where at the end 5% of the people own 95% of the Bitcoins .
Now only theoreticly , without considering the technical feasibility:
What if now the majority decides that every individual can have only one Bitcoinwallet ? Now what if the majority further decides that each wallet can only contain a certain number of Bitcoins , and all the wallets exceeding this maximum, automaticly distribute the surplus evenly to all wallets?
The majority would benefit , so why should the majority not decide for it?
This is just a hypothesis which ignores any technical consideration.
(i know this is probably a very unpopular post for liberals; try to be kind please)
Thoughts?
I think your idea is great and straight to the point. Just posted this here before reading your post. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=382645.0
Distribution of wealth through technology and democracy, good stuff!
Hey guys.
Not just since I got involved with BTC I have been thinking a lot about our monetary system worldwide and the system in general.
It seems like there are a lot of bright and kind-of-like-minded people around in this forum so I would like to share some thoughts to see what you think. I am gonna throw in my ideas about how stuff could be done in a better way that is more social and democratic. I don't have a degree in economics or anything, these are just ramblings. Any input is welcome. A lot of the good things to come will be achieved through technology that still has to be invented I think.
1) Financials
Our societies run on greed. Capitalism depends on greed because that's what drives everything forward. The situation at hand is deeply anti-social. Try explaining this to a little kid:
- We think wealth should be shared in a fair manner
BUT
- If you have money it automatically becomes more money without you doing anything
- If you have no money (debt) your balance will automatically become more negative leaving you with less money
How does this fit together?
--> The whole system of interest and debt needs to go. Also what about the 1%? There is no need for any person to own gazillions of Dollars, Euros, Rubbels, Yuan, whatever. Private property should be limited to some degree. Let's say nobody is allowed to own more than 5 million dollars. With all the money left over from the rich people who own more than that you could probably feed half of the world. With 5 million there would still be enough incentive to get busy and make something nice to earn money. I know that this is impossible to control right now so it's just an idea.
Bitcoin is a good start and it can do a lot of amazing things, like take power from the banks. But even if it gets widely adopted the underlying system still stays the same.
2) Democracy
The democratic systems are overly complicated and easy to cheat or influence. Technology will enable us to install a new form of democracy, the real stuff this time. The reason why there is no direct vote by the public for a lot of stuff is that the logistics for that used to be overwhelming. You have to send a letter to everybody and have people come to a place to drop their vote and so on. In Switzerland they actually do a lot of public votes on important questions and it works because it's a really small country. Now with the internet this should also be possible for large countries with a big population.
What's needed is a technology that is somehow locked to individuals but still anonymous. Let's say your DNA pattern was a public key and you would use that to cast your vote. I have no clue if something like this is possible but you need to make sure that everybody can only vote once without having to identify people. Maybe someone who knows a bit more about tech stuff has an idea...
3) Media
The media can't just throw shit at people and force them to consume it, as in traditional TV. It has to be streamed on demand and also produced on demand. It has already changed a lot, there is so much good stuff available on the internet.
One important idea I think is peer-funded content where you really support the stuff you like instead of paying a flat fee to some network. This also flattens the hierarchy and makes it harder for someone to own or influence the whole network. Just look at how many awesome documentaries were made possible through Kickstarter and the likes...
---
I'll probably add to this later, maybe you have some ideas as well how to awesomize our little planet so that when someday the aliens land they won't laugh at us too hard but maybe give us a high-five.
Not just since I got involved with BTC I have been thinking a lot about our monetary system worldwide and the system in general.
It seems like there are a lot of bright and kind-of-like-minded people around in this forum so I would like to share some thoughts to see what you think. I am gonna throw in my ideas about how stuff could be done in a better way that is more social and democratic. I don't have a degree in economics or anything, these are just ramblings. Any input is welcome. A lot of the good things to come will be achieved through technology that still has to be invented I think.
1) Financials
Our societies run on greed. Capitalism depends on greed because that's what drives everything forward. The situation at hand is deeply anti-social. Try explaining this to a little kid:
- We think wealth should be shared in a fair manner
BUT
- If you have money it automatically becomes more money without you doing anything
- If you have no money (debt) your balance will automatically become more negative leaving you with less money
How does this fit together?
--> The whole system of interest and debt needs to go. Also what about the 1%? There is no need for any person to own gazillions of Dollars, Euros, Rubbels, Yuan, whatever. Private property should be limited to some degree. Let's say nobody is allowed to own more than 5 million dollars. With all the money left over from the rich people who own more than that you could probably feed half of the world. With 5 million there would still be enough incentive to get busy and make something nice to earn money. I know that this is impossible to control right now so it's just an idea.
Bitcoin is a good start and it can do a lot of amazing things, like take power from the banks. But even if it gets widely adopted the underlying system still stays the same.
2) Democracy
The democratic systems are overly complicated and easy to cheat or influence. Technology will enable us to install a new form of democracy, the real stuff this time. The reason why there is no direct vote by the public for a lot of stuff is that the logistics for that used to be overwhelming. You have to send a letter to everybody and have people come to a place to drop their vote and so on. In Switzerland they actually do a lot of public votes on important questions and it works because it's a really small country. Now with the internet this should also be possible for large countries with a big population.
What's needed is a technology that is somehow locked to individuals but still anonymous. Let's say your DNA pattern was a public key and you would use that to cast your vote. I have no clue if something like this is possible but you need to make sure that everybody can only vote once without having to identify people. Maybe someone who knows a bit more about tech stuff has an idea...
3) Media
The media can't just throw shit at people and force them to consume it, as in traditional TV. It has to be streamed on demand and also produced on demand. It has already changed a lot, there is so much good stuff available on the internet.
One important idea I think is peer-funded content where you really support the stuff you like instead of paying a flat fee to some network. This also flattens the hierarchy and makes it harder for someone to own or influence the whole network. Just look at how many awesome documentaries were made possible through Kickstarter and the likes...
---
I'll probably add to this later, maybe you have some ideas as well how to awesomize our little planet so that when someday the aliens land they won't laugh at us too hard but maybe give us a high-five.
Re: I can nearly pinpoint when American Capitalism started to die
Capitalism was great when the alternative was monarchies and dictatorships But when the enemy of Capitalism became Communism that is when problems arose
Communism and socialism are not bad at their core Government working for the people is not a bad thing
So the fact that we completely reject the idea of a government that is nothing but a service industry Actually hurts us in the long run
Sure we are capitalist but monarchs and dictators are no longer the aristocratic ass holes... Capitalists are
Communism is where the people own the factories What is unamerican about that?
Communism and socialism are not bad at their core Government working for the people is not a bad thing
So the fact that we completely reject the idea of a government that is nothing but a service industry Actually hurts us in the long run
Sure we are capitalist but monarchs and dictators are no longer the aristocratic ass holes... Capitalists are
Communism is where the people own the factories What is unamerican about that?
very true!
communism is always seen as the devil when you talk to hardcore capitalists because it endangers the free markets and such. well but the free markets really endanger us as people.
it's all soaked with corruption. greed is the prevailing attitude.
democrarcy in the the US is a thing of the past. a democracy with two parties, seriously? and the one with the most money wins. the system is a joke. and i think no other western nation has such an effective brainwashing machinery going to keep their people uninformed and distracted.
while at the same time i have a feeling that more and more people are waking up from the american dream and realize they are stuck with a system that only acts in favor of the 1% and abuses all the rest.
apart from that the US is an amazingly beautiful country and there are lots of awesome people over there.
democrarcy in the the US is a thing of the past. a democracy with two parties, seriously? and the one with the most money wins. the system is a joke. and i think no other western nation has such an effective brainwashing machinery going to keep their people uninformed and distracted.
while at the same time i have a feeling that more and more people are waking up from the american dream and realize they are stuck with a system that only acts in favor of the 1% and abuses all the rest.
apart from that the US is an amazingly beautiful country and there are lots of awesome people over there.
This patent/application needs to be vigorously challenged.
+100000!
Bitcoin is about way more than just a currency. Its about DECENTRALIZATION because we all see what happens if the power is in the hands of few.
Check out the latest episode of Lets talk Bitcoin for a glimpse of the future!
http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/mind-to-matter/lets-talk-bitcoin?refid=stpr
Oh and power to the people!
its more like beaming (as in star trek) cash to an unregistered post box.
because you cant just go and beat someone up. you have to locate them first and travel there. or send someone.
if the other guy does not want to be found it might be very hard to track him down...
because you cant just go and beat someone up. you have to locate them first and travel there. or send someone.
if the other guy does not want to be found it might be very hard to track him down...