I'm an architect and I'm pretty interested in Bitcoin. I've done a lot of research and in my opinion, we're looking at a transformative technology that's here to stay.
I understand many won't agree, but walk with me on a hypothetical. The hypothetical is that Bitcoin becomes the global monetary standard. Simply put, this means a return to a hard (and limited) money with digital attributes. There are two main points I'm contemplating.
The first thought relates to hard, scarce money. In my professional experience I've observed how debt financing and outrunning inflation costs govern the sometimes breakneck urgency of work and construction. What would it be like if the project were carried out with a hard money like Bitcoin, one where the supply is known and limited? Where urgency to hurry and spend and build was less pervasive? In a disinflationary environment, money 'costs more' and the motivation to not spend increases, so spending is done more carefully. Some economists worry about this leading to stagflation, but eternal expansion has problems too.
The second thought relates to immediate settlement. The payment process can be astonishingly slow, cumbersome, and bogged down with intermediaries. On a Bitcoin standard, all settlement between parties is immediate and final. Bitcoin the asset is itself the bearer instrument. In this way it's like making a transaction in gold itself. It's fully collateralized and does not represent an obligation to tender. Further it involves no intermediary to process, no third party to custody, and can transact at any amount desired 24/7. How might this impact transparency, accountability, or trust between parties? How might a diminished cushion of debt financing change how we spend and build?
I'm broadly asking how a return to hard money might impact the economy and obviously architecture. I think this could change everything from schedules and time horizon to zoning and code to supply chains to skilled labor and so on. If you have thoughts on this scenario, not likelihood, I'd like to hear them. If you would like references, I'm happy to share some.
Rusty!
Aug 21, 21 2:29 pm
This month's layoffs are brought to you by crypto volatility.
Scenario 1: Design contract signed for $100k in Dec 2017. Architect receives $17k equivalent for their services in Jan 2019.
Scenario 2: Design contract signed for $100k in March 2020. Architect receives $1.2MILLION equivalent in April 2020.
Or are all other expenses paid in Bitcoin as well? Payroll? I was promised a 0.004 bitcoin raise!
If crypto becomes a method of payment for design services, it will be structured such to make sure Architect enjoys no additional benefits, and takes on all additional risks.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 21, 21 5:49 pm
The YoY return on Bitcoin has been +200% per annum on average since inception. There is no point in its price history that you could have bought and lost money if you held for four years. It seems foolish to me to be terrified of volatility that has historically trended to the upside.
More to the point, if the hypothetical plays out, it will be because adoption lessens the volatility as more goods (commodities probably first) are actually priced in Bitcoin. There is only volatility when you exchange with an unrelated currency. Bitcoin's supply strictly speaking is as nonvolatile, predictable as any money standard has ever been. When goods take this as the benchmark, what you perceive as volatile will dramatically shift
But yes. Payroll services, you name it. Even if used with a dollar that is backed by Bitcoin as the reserve this would fit the hypothesis of a Bitcoin standard. This is the hypothetical I'm looking at.
Wood Guy
Aug 22, 21 4:41 pm
Bitcoin has been around for about twelve years. It seems foolish to me to think that having positive returns for twelve years would suggest that the trend will continue indefinitely, if you look at any other investment of any type.
The resources needed to mine Bitcoin are outrageous and nowhere near sustainable; if there is going to be a stable global currency, it can't require the amount of energy (and carbon emissions) that Bitcoin does.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 23, 21 2:06 am
I definitely understand where you're coming from. What you're describing is the debate between Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS) and it's definitely a contentious debate. Proof of Work demands the use of energy at a level the market determines. Proof of Stake works very differently. Personally I support PoW for a range of reasons. Also, I don't advocate speculation and it's not my aim here. No investment can ever guarantee a return. But I don't view Bitcoin as an "investment" in the conventional sense. It's a bearer asset and a monetary network and its value comes from its utility - and PoW.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 21, 21 4:14 pm
Bitcoin and crypto in general is an unregulated speculative virtual investment device and tax dodge. While governments want to transition to digital currency, any transition will be done for the benefit of banksters and the corporate financial complex.
Money is power, can’t have it falling into the wrong hands. All of this came about precisely because some people have far too much money and the only thing they can think about is how to multiply it without contributing anything to society.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 21, 21 6:03 pm
You haven't really entertained the hypothetical. Forget the name "Bitcoin" and crypto. Call it a return to the "gold standard" if this helps. My point is to imagine what a deflationary, hard monetary standard would do to our habits or work and exchange locally and nonlocally.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 21, 21 7:46 pm
When the hypothetical has no basis in reality it is at best entertainment. In this case it is just stupidity.
Research the gold standard and associated problems (taking into account that was a physical basis as opposed to crypto, where there is no basis) and Modern Monetary Theory.
Crypto (like all fiat) is an artificial construct and subject to the same manipulations of all fiat currencies - with the additional aspect of digital manipulation.
curtkram
Aug 22, 21 2:21 pm
i don't think cryptocurrencies count as fiat. buying bitcoin is closer to buying gold than it is to buying dollars or euros.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 23, 21 8:58 am
Blockchain aside, the only difference between crypto and fiat is that fiat is issued by governments. Neither are 'hard money' (commodity backed).
JAK-90825
Aug 22, 21 12:07 pm
Ill be flyin high on doge soon!
To the freaking mooon!
archinine
Aug 22, 21 4:47 pm
“On a Bitcoin standard, all settlement between parties is immediate and final. Bitcoin the asset is itself the bearer instrument. In this way it's like making a transaction in gold itself. It's fully collateralized and does not represent an obligation to tender. Further it involves no intermediary to process, no third party to custody, and can transact at any amount desired 24/7.”
Transactions are not immediate and final without an intermediary. Blocks are mined every 10 minutes.
Good discussion though. Having a hard price for global assets or materials like steel would remove speculation in the market pricing since it would be the same every year. To your point less pressure on schedules from inflationary costs, though construction loans would still have interest.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 22, 21 7:31 pm
The financial world is built on speculation (as of late largely in crypto). Global material prices have nothing to do with currency types, except to the extent of specualtion and maipulation between them.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 22, 21 7:34 pm
As to immediate settlement, banks don't do this because they profit from holding money. It's not that they can't, it's that they don't.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 23, 21 1:06 am
Thanks for your observation, Archenine. You're picking up on the questions I really wanted to explore here - what a return to a hard currency standard might do to time preference, and as a result, how we build.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 23, 21 1:51 am
Speaking strictly about Bitcoin, all transactions on the main chain are indeed fully settled, irreversible, and conducted without an intermediary. As for clearance time it's true that settlement can take up to an hour on the main chain (this is actually a security attribute of the network's protocol), but most of the time will process in a few minutes. There's actually a second layer being built that does deliver practically instantaneous final settlement. That's not hyperbole. I'll limit the technical stuff there.
All that being said, it's still light years ahead of legacy finance on those metrics, though operability and adoption are certainly where it lags for now. This is one area where I wonder how working relationships could evolve.
And I do wonder what a return to hard money and low time preference would mean for the supply chain and lending rates in particular.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 23, 21 8:54 am
'hard money' is a commodity- backed currency. Crypto (including bitcoin) is not hard money. Your misconceptions and fundamental ignorance of economics are profound.
BUY NOW! There's an independent source - an investment firm.
Wood Guy
Aug 23, 21 1:32 pm
It's the first of many similar articles. The problem, or the interesting thing, is that crypto is a whole new form of currency, not quite like anything else. I've come to think of it as akin to owning land, but with more liquidity. But no analogies are perfect.
Bench
Aug 23, 21 10:06 am
Ugh.
I come here so that I don't need to hear my tech bro friends drone on about this shit.
Wood Guy
Aug 23, 21 11:33 am
If only there was a way to know what the thread would be about before you opened it... ;-)
wow, those inforgraphics are insane; i knew it was bad but not that bad. once again we've invented an arguably "useful" technology that will only hasten our collapse.
we don't need this shit.. when will we learn that enough is enough?
SneakyPete
Aug 23, 21 1:50 pm
I fucking hate how money has supplanted everything else of value on this fucking planet.
JLC-1
Aug 23, 21 2:19 pm
the other dark fact about bitcoin is it's widely used for black market transactions, human trafficking, drug deals, bribes, etc.
JLC-1
Aug 23, 21 4:17 pm
my older son, now a computer scientist, asked me about 12 years ago if he could "mine bitcoin" at home - I told him no because he explained how it needed a dedicated machine 24 hours a day for who knows how long to get just one bitcoin.
op, this is a white whale. focus on getting your masters, becoming an official architect, and then maybe you might have to worry about things like where the money comes from- but chances are those sorts of concerns are many years away, if they come at all.
or, better yet, invent something that makes mining bitcoin energy productive.
Lukas Weidner
Aug 23, 21 6:52 pm
I appreciate the thoughtful response. Architecture first. Cheers
1st point: The breakneck speed of construction has less to do with inflation and more to do with risk. Yes, inflation is always a risk, but it is generally one that is built in. Inflation is not "runaway." We are currently experiencing inflation that is being tracked by the federal reserve. This is built into a pro forma. The past year has certainly been wild and exposed a lot of risk to builders everywhere. But this isn't the "norm." If it is the new norm, then it simply is the new norm and future projects will also build this into the pro forma. The breakneck speed has to do with getting a project done as quickly as possible to reduce any other risks where the developer/owner could lose value with the end product. Bitcoin will not do anything to solve this.
2nd point: The payment process is slow?? What exactly are you referring to? The requisition process or the ACH transaction? The requisition process of many large projects is probably 99% of the time in processing a project's monthly payment. This would be the same regardless of the method of payment. I agree that the US banking system is completely outdated and the way we transfer funds is bonkers. Have you looked into the systems that other nations in Europe and Asia transfer funds? It's far quicker and funds are available relatively instantly. I have never experienced a requisition where the speed of bitcoin transaction processing would have any effect on the subcontractors making actual architecture.
Miles Jaffe
Aug 23, 21 7:50 pm
Inflation is the result of the pandemic combined with the trade war with China. Shortages causes price increases, and even when there aren’t shortages it has been an excuse to raise prices ( and profits). Various authorities (read Wall St. and the govt.) welcome this as an antidote to the deflationary cycle the economy was falling into.
lamp4036
Sep 8, 21 9:48 am
You're pretty deep down the rabbit hole Lukas, welcome aboard. You're right about everything, Bitcoin is going to take over the world, people just cant see it yet. Were all lucky to even have heard about it this early.
square.
Sep 8, 21 10:24 am
just like those autonomous cars we were promised...
"I think I'll go to sleep and dream about piles of gold getting bigger and bigger and bigger." -- Fred C. Dobbs (Humphrey Bogart, The Treasure of Sierra Madre.
newguy
Sep 8, 21 2:25 pm
I've watched the crypto ecosystem
explode from the sidelines, but only recently bothered to make the
political connections that seem to be making themselves clear. Here are
a few of my observations (as someone who identifies politically with
the left), and how I can see things shaking out. Just thought I'd share
Libertarian Derp:
Libertarianism
as it exists in the united states, has always been an effective way to
roll anti-government distrust from mostly upper middle class white males
into the arms of the American conservative movement. The people most drawn to the
crypto ecosystem seem to have strong (American) Libertarian leanings
(not to be confused with the traditional use of the word libertarian,
which was associated with left-leaning anarchist philosophy). In the
American (heritage foundation, right-leaning) Libertarian sphere, you'll
find mostly college educated white males with comfortable petite
bourgeois lifestyles who have a strong distaste for the role of the
state while simultaneously having a major boner for private property
rights. There is a major contradiction here that often goes
un-reconciled with the Libertarian crowd: How, without the role of the
state, are private property rights enforced? Scratch just beneath the
surface of this question, and you'll find that the what really animates
their animosity toward government is their contempt for communities who
are more likely to benefit from the existence of the welfare state
(minorities) and (((CenTrAL BAnkeRs)))...ahem....more on that later.
The Role of the State:
Those on the left usually share the critique that the state is primarily used as an instrument that props up and
uses violence against poor and minority communities and agitators via
the police and carceral state in order to protect the interests of the
capitalist class and private property. Likewise, those on the left also view warfare and
imperialism as the highest form of capitalism, and as a method of
securing foreign goods and resources while suppressing local labor
rights. If you consider yourself to be a liberal (and thus more moderate), you view the state as an
instrument that can be calibrated to blunt the exploitative excesses of
capitalism. But if you are a Libertarian, you view the state as an
obstruction to the natural order of capitalism (which brings about order through questionable hierarchies). Libertarian theory
submits that capitalism can be re-created and streamlined without
intervention from the state. Taken to its natural conclusion,
Libertarian philosophy would necessitate the need for private militias
and security forces to violently enforce the property rights of their
adherents.
Libertarians and Crypto:
This is usually where the two merge. Libertarians
are drawn to crypto because it creates a parallel economy that is free
of government regulation. Yet, when they get completely fleeced by
corrupt exchanges or guys or fraudsters posing as tech support, they immediately appeal to existing laws and
regulatory systems to help them recoup their losses. This exposes
another major contradiction in their logic: Why is it that they are
strongly opposed to the role of the state when it comes to paying taxes
for basic services that benefit all members of society and basic
regulations, but suddenly want the full weight of the state to intervene
in their favor once they've been rooked by somebody with a reddit
account? Libertarians have a warped view of the role of the state, as
they believe that the state acts as an impediment toward the free market
and free association, rather than seeing the state as an instrument
that actually preserves the excess of capitalism that they are foolishly trying to secure. This puts them in an
intellectual pretzel where they want to be protected from their own
stupidity, but still view themselves as members who should be a top of
the capitalist pyramid, and they believe that being early on a new
currency that they control can help them achieve that.
Libertarians, the right, and thinly veiled racism/anti-semitism:
Libertarian
philosophy really gained steam in the US with the Ron Paul presidential
campaign. During the aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse, it was
very common to see college-aged white males flock to his failed
presidential campaigns and express their political consciousness with
signs of "Audit the Fed / End the Fed" at many of his rallies. If you
hung around any message board, you were likely to come across a
Libertarian espousing the virtues of limited government and less
economic control from "central bankers." This sentiment usually reeked
of conspiratorial thinking that usually sanitized historical accusations
of "secret cabals" of "international bankers" manipulating markets and
regulations. Contrast this with the overwhelming popular election of
the nations first black president, and you can begin to view a picture
of white male insecurity suddenly concerned with rising inflation and
the collapse of the dollar at the hands of a minority president who
would surely use his power and influence to redirect wealth to
undesirables (minorities). Of course, that never happened, but the sentiment
prevailed and the result was the most reactionary and right-wing
presidential campaign in modern US history that led to the birth of a
burgeoning nationalist and nativisit movement that culminated in a
literal failed attempt to ransack and overthrow the government.
The point is, while the technology of digitizing currency might be an inevitability, currency itself cannot exist without the direct support of the state, as the state is the only institution that has granted itself the ability to use violence as a means of greasing the wheels of capitalism, vis-a-vis state-sanctioned violence against the underclass in the interest of the propertied class, and/or via the suppression of the labor pool that creates the surplus value of "profit" that underpins capitalism to begin with. The folly of Bitcoin and all crypto currencies (and libertarian thinking at large) is the belief that value is inherent and determined by demand, rather than the understanding that "value" or "profit" is actually generated by labor (i.e, the workers). And this is quite evident in the literal pyramid structure of the entire crypto ecosystem, where the value of the asset is only really determined by the number of "investors" at the bottom of the pyramid, and not directly tied to any form of productivity.
It's Mickey Mouse, mate. Spurious. Not Genuine.
square.
Sep 8, 21 4:04 pm
for once, a rant worth reading.
Miles Jaffe
Sep 8, 21 6:04 pm
+++
I'll quibble over sematics before making more general comments. 'Left' and 'right' are overly broad political categorizations that reflect and promote the illusion of the bifurcation of the state. (Without getting bogged down on this point, the most recognizable feature of the illusion of bifurcation is the failure of the two party system to address any of the needs of the general population).
When someone talks about left / right the assumption is that they are talking talking about Dem / Rep. This is inane as more voters are registered as independent than either party. Thus 'left and right' by definition excludes the largest political group.
I find more defiinitive terminology such as progressive, conservative, etc. avoids this kind of broadly associative labeling and is more descriptive of actual political leanings.
As to libertarianism, it's principle claim of anti-violence is contradicted by its willful adoption of economic violence, in particular its stand against all social programs. Letting people starve to death or suffer and die from the lack of health care is "freedom". This is essentially anarchism without physical violence.
tduds
Sep 8, 21 6:15 pm
One thumbs up is not enough.
rcz1001
Sep 8, 21 10:06 pm
Luke Weidner,
Cryptocurrency is like "stock" except you are not owning anything. It like the unregulated currencies or special notes that used to be issued by banks before we had an established standard currency and so the value of these notes is really just a glorified IOU from the certificate issuer that you traded say.... so many ounces of gold for some number of these note (an exchange) which can either go in your favor or it doesn't. Except it's totally unregulated. Since many of these systems of the 19th century doesn't exist anymore when banking institutions began to be more regulated and these kinds of things are no longer 'legal tender'. As an alternative to this, people then went into buying stocks and they get a percentage of interest in companies. When the companies grow in value, their financial interest goes. Mechanically, it all works fundamentally the same other than the technical mechanics. The principle is people are operating cryptocurrency as the new "stock market" game where historically, the game is to buy stocks when the price per stock is low, and sell when it is high.... you gain wealth. They do EXACTLY that with cryptocurrency. It's about buying low.... selling high and your gain is in the difference......provide you don't have to wait so long that the inflation rate of fully legally recognized currency outpaced your gain ratio.
The legality of cryptocurrency is something that is still being contested and it's only a matter of time when governments establish a government ruling system regulating cryptocurrency because once they put the quantum computer online (which governments will have access to and through national security acts and similar provisions and a military force to back it....keep you from legally owning such a computer because governments only exist to control the subjects. The U.S. government as with all governments exists to control the people ruled and controlled by special privileged interests. Always..... a few in control of everyone else. It is how humans operate and how humans govern. This is the limit of our genetic capacity. To evolve beyond this means we are no longer human. It's genetically impossible yet we think it's going to be possible to be any different. Fundamental flaws of our nature is that we are selfish and because of it, we can't establish a lasting viable government where the people rule and are not ruled by what is nothing more than a special privileged 'cabal'. These interests aren't interested in equally sharing the wealth of the world.
I'm skeptical of cryptocurrency and do not hold high regards of human nature and even less the institutions that are biproducts of human nature.
I'm an architect and I'm pretty interested in Bitcoin. I've done a lot of research and in my opinion, we're looking at a transformative technology that's here to stay.
I understand many won't agree, but walk with me on a hypothetical. The hypothetical is that Bitcoin becomes the global monetary standard. Simply put, this means a return to a hard (and limited) money with digital attributes. There are two main points I'm contemplating.
The first thought relates to hard, scarce money. In my professional experience I've observed how debt financing and outrunning inflation costs govern the sometimes breakneck urgency of work and construction. What would it be like if the project were carried out with a hard money like Bitcoin, one where the supply is known and limited? Where urgency to hurry and spend and build was less pervasive? In a disinflationary environment, money 'costs more' and the motivation to not spend increases, so spending is done more carefully. Some economists worry about this leading to stagflation, but eternal expansion has problems too.
The second thought relates to immediate settlement. The payment process can be astonishingly slow, cumbersome, and bogged down with intermediaries. On a Bitcoin standard, all settlement between parties is immediate and final. Bitcoin the asset is itself the bearer instrument. In this way it's like making a transaction in gold itself. It's fully collateralized and does not represent an obligation to tender. Further it involves no intermediary to process, no third party to custody, and can transact at any amount desired 24/7. How might this impact transparency, accountability, or trust between parties? How might a diminished cushion of debt financing change how we spend and build?
I'm broadly asking how a return to hard money might impact the economy and obviously architecture. I think this could change everything from schedules and time horizon to zoning and code to supply chains to skilled labor and so on. If you have thoughts on this scenario, not likelihood, I'd like to hear them. If you would like references, I'm happy to share some.
This month's layoffs are brought to you by crypto volatility.
Scenario 1: Design contract signed for $100k in Dec 2017. Architect receives $17k equivalent for their services in Jan 2019.
Scenario 2: Design contract signed for $100k in March 2020. Architect receives $1.2MILLION equivalent in April 2020.
Or are all other expenses paid in Bitcoin as well? Payroll? I was promised a 0.004 bitcoin raise!
If crypto becomes a method of payment for design services, it will be structured such to make sure Architect enjoys no additional benefits, and takes on all additional risks.
The YoY return on Bitcoin has been +200% per annum on average since inception. There is no point in its price history that you could have bought and lost money if you held for four years. It seems foolish to me to be terrified of volatility that has historically trended to the upside.
More to the point, if the hypothetical plays out, it will be because adoption lessens the volatility as more goods (commodities probably first) are actually priced in Bitcoin. There is only volatility when you exchange with an unrelated currency. Bitcoin's supply strictly speaking is as nonvolatile, predictable as any money standard has ever been. When goods take this as the benchmark, what you perceive as volatile will dramatically shift
But yes. Payroll services, you name it. Even if used with a dollar that is backed by Bitcoin as the reserve this would fit the hypothesis of a Bitcoin standard. This is the hypothetical I'm looking at.
Bitcoin has been around for about twelve years. It seems foolish to me to think that having positive returns for twelve years would suggest that the trend will continue indefinitely, if you look at any other investment of any type.
The resources needed to mine Bitcoin are outrageous and nowhere near sustainable; if there is going to be a stable global currency, it can't require the amount of energy (and carbon emissions) that Bitcoin does.
I definitely understand where you're coming from. What you're describing is the debate between Proof of Work (PoW) and Proof of Stake (PoS) and it's definitely a contentious debate. Proof of Work demands the use of energy at a level the market determines. Proof of Stake works very differently. Personally I support PoW for a range of reasons. Also, I don't advocate speculation and it's not my aim here. No investment can ever guarantee a return. But I don't view Bitcoin as an "investment" in the conventional sense. It's a bearer asset and a monetary network and its value comes from its utility - and PoW.
Bitcoin and crypto in general is an unregulated speculative virtual investment device and tax dodge. While governments want to transition to digital currency, any transition will be done for the benefit of banksters and the corporate financial complex.
Money is power, can’t have it falling into the wrong hands. All of this came about precisely because some people have far too much money and the only thing they can think about is how to multiply it without contributing anything to society.
You haven't really entertained the hypothetical. Forget the name "Bitcoin" and crypto. Call it a return to the "gold standard" if this helps. My point is to imagine what a deflationary, hard monetary standard would do to our habits or work and exchange locally and nonlocally.
When the hypothetical has no basis in reality it is at best entertainment. In this case it is just stupidity.
Research the gold standard and associated problems (taking into account that was a physical basis as opposed to crypto, where there is no basis) and Modern Monetary Theory.
Crypto (like all fiat) is an artificial construct and subject to the same manipulations of all fiat currencies - with the additional aspect of digital manipulation.
i don't think cryptocurrencies count as fiat. buying bitcoin is closer to buying gold than it is to buying dollars or euros.
Blockchain aside, the only difference between crypto and fiat is that fiat is issued by governments. Neither are 'hard money' (commodity backed).
Ill be flyin high on doge soon!
To the freaking mooon!
“On a Bitcoin standard, all settlement between parties is immediate and final. Bitcoin the asset is itself the bearer instrument. In this way it's like making a transaction in gold itself. It's fully collateralized and does not represent an obligation to tender. Further it involves no intermediary to process, no third party to custody, and can transact at any amount desired 24/7.”
Transactions are not immediate and final without an intermediary. Blocks are mined every 10 minutes.
Good discussion though. Having a hard price for global assets or materials like steel would remove speculation in the market pricing since it would be the same every year. To your point less pressure on schedules from inflationary costs, though construction loans would still have interest.
The financial world is built on speculation (as of late largely in crypto). Global material prices have nothing to do with currency types, except to the extent of specualtion and maipulation between them.
As to immediate settlement, banks don't do this because they profit from holding money. It's not that they can't, it's that they don't.
Thanks for your observation, Archenine. You're picking up on the questions I really wanted to explore here - what a return to a hard currency standard might do to time preference, and as a result, how we build.
Speaking strictly about Bitcoin, all transactions on the main chain are indeed fully settled, irreversible, and conducted without an intermediary. As for clearance time it's true that settlement can take up to an hour on the main chain (this is actually a security attribute of the network's protocol), but most of the time will process in a few minutes. There's actually a second layer being built that does deliver practically instantaneous final settlement. That's not hyperbole. I'll limit the technical stuff there. All that being said, it's still light years ahead of legacy finance on those metrics, though operability and adoption are certainly where it lags for now. This is one area where I wonder how working relationships could evolve. And I do wonder what a return to hard money and low time preference would mean for the supply chain and lending rates in particular.
'hard money' is a commodity- backed currency. Crypto (including bitcoin) is not hard money. Your misconceptions and fundamental ignorance of economics are profound.
Miles, regarding hard money, I agree, at least based on traditional meanings. But this is a compelling argument otherwise: https://tradesmithdaily.com/educational/bitcoin-is-the-purest-form-of-hard-money-ever-created-2/.
BUY NOW! There's an independent source - an investment firm.
It's the first of many similar articles. The problem, or the interesting thing, is that crypto is a whole new form of currency, not quite like anything else. I've come to think of it as akin to owning land, but with more liquidity. But no analogies are perfect.
Ugh.
I come here so that I don't need to hear my tech bro friends drone on about this shit.
If only there was a way to know what the thread would be about before you opened it... ;-)
I feel attacked
.
this shit is bad, especially if you call yourself an "architect" https://qz.com/2023032/how-muc...
wow, those inforgraphics are insane; i knew it was bad but not that bad. once again we've invented an arguably "useful" technology that will only hasten our collapse.
we don't need this shit.. when will we learn that enough is enough?
I fucking hate how money has supplanted everything else of value on this fucking planet.
the other dark fact about bitcoin is it's widely used for black market transactions, human trafficking, drug deals, bribes, etc.
my older son, now a computer scientist, asked me about 12 years ago if he could "mine bitcoin" at home - I told him no because he explained how it needed a dedicated machine 24 hours a day for who knows how long to get just one bitcoin.
https://www.cnet.com/personal-...
easy problem to solve. build a dyson sphere
op, this is a white whale. focus on getting your masters, becoming an official architect, and then maybe you might have to worry about things like where the money comes from- but chances are those sorts of concerns are many years away, if they come at all.
or, better yet, invent something that makes mining bitcoin energy productive.
I appreciate the thoughtful response. Architecture first. Cheers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-P2qL3qkzk
1st point: The breakneck speed of construction has less to do with inflation and more to do with risk. Yes, inflation is always a risk, but it is generally one that is built in. Inflation is not "runaway." We are currently experiencing inflation that is being tracked by the federal reserve. This is built into a pro forma. The past year has certainly been wild and exposed a lot of risk to builders everywhere. But this isn't the "norm." If it is the new norm, then it simply is the new norm and future projects will also build this into the pro forma. The breakneck speed has to do with getting a project done as quickly as possible to reduce any other risks where the developer/owner could lose value with the end product. Bitcoin will not do anything to solve this.
2nd point: The payment process is slow?? What exactly are you referring to? The requisition process or the ACH transaction? The requisition process of many large projects is probably 99% of the time in processing a project's monthly payment. This would be the same regardless of the method of payment. I agree that the US banking system is completely outdated and the way we transfer funds is bonkers. Have you looked into the systems that other nations in Europe and Asia transfer funds? It's far quicker and funds are available relatively instantly. I have never experienced a requisition where the speed of bitcoin transaction processing would have any effect on the subcontractors making actual architecture.
Inflation is the result of the pandemic combined with the trade war with China. Shortages causes price increases, and even when there aren’t shortages it has been an excuse to raise prices ( and profits). Various authorities (read Wall St. and the govt.) welcome this as an antidote to the deflationary cycle the economy was falling into.
You're pretty deep down the rabbit hole Lukas, welcome aboard. You're right about everything, Bitcoin is going to take over the world, people just cant see it yet. Were all lucky to even have heard about it this early.
just like those autonomous cars we were promised...
El Salvador
Hahahaaaaaa!
"I think I'll go to sleep and dream about piles of gold getting bigger and bigger and bigger." -- Fred C. Dobbs (Humphrey Bogart, The Treasure of Sierra Madre.
I've watched the crypto ecosystem explode from the sidelines, but only recently bothered to make the political connections that seem to be making themselves clear. Here are a few of my observations (as someone who identifies politically with the left), and how I can see things shaking out. Just thought I'd share
Libertarian Derp:
Libertarianism as it exists in the united states, has always been an effective way to roll anti-government distrust from mostly upper middle class white males into the arms of the American conservative movement. The people most drawn to the crypto ecosystem seem to have strong (American) Libertarian leanings (not to be confused with the traditional use of the word libertarian, which was associated with left-leaning anarchist philosophy). In the American (heritage foundation, right-leaning) Libertarian sphere, you'll find mostly college educated white males with comfortable petite bourgeois lifestyles who have a strong distaste for the role of the state while simultaneously having a major boner for private property rights. There is a major contradiction here that often goes un-reconciled with the Libertarian crowd: How, without the role of the state, are private property rights enforced? Scratch just beneath the surface of this question, and you'll find that the what really animates their animosity toward government is their contempt for communities who are more likely to benefit from the existence of the welfare state (minorities) and (((CenTrAL BAnkeRs)))...ahem....more on that later.
The Role of the State:
Those on the left usually share the critique that the state is primarily used as an instrument that props up and uses violence against poor and minority communities and agitators via the police and carceral state in order to protect the interests of the capitalist class and private property. Likewise, those on the left also view warfare and imperialism as the highest form of capitalism, and as a method of securing foreign goods and resources while suppressing local labor rights. If you consider yourself to be a liberal (and thus more moderate), you view the state as an instrument that can be calibrated to blunt the exploitative excesses of capitalism. But if you are a Libertarian, you view the state as an obstruction to the natural order of capitalism (which brings about order through questionable hierarchies). Libertarian theory submits that capitalism can be re-created and streamlined without intervention from the state. Taken to its natural conclusion, Libertarian philosophy would necessitate the need for private militias and security forces to violently enforce the property rights of their adherents.
Libertarians and Crypto:
This is usually where the two merge. Libertarians are drawn to crypto because it creates a parallel economy that is free of government regulation. Yet, when they get completely fleeced by corrupt exchanges or guys or fraudsters posing as tech support, they immediately appeal to existing laws and regulatory systems to help them recoup their losses. This exposes another major contradiction in their logic: Why is it that they are strongly opposed to the role of the state when it comes to paying taxes for basic services that benefit all members of society and basic regulations, but suddenly want the full weight of the state to intervene in their favor once they've been rooked by somebody with a reddit account? Libertarians have a warped view of the role of the state, as they believe that the state acts as an impediment toward the free market and free association, rather than seeing the state as an instrument that actually preserves the excess of capitalism that they are foolishly trying to secure. This puts them in an intellectual pretzel where they want to be protected from their own stupidity, but still view themselves as members who should be a top of the capitalist pyramid, and they believe that being early on a new currency that they control can help them achieve that.
Libertarians, the right, and thinly veiled racism/anti-semitism:
Libertarian philosophy really gained steam in the US with the Ron Paul presidential campaign. During the aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse, it was very common to see college-aged white males flock to his failed presidential campaigns and express their political consciousness with signs of "Audit the Fed / End the Fed" at many of his rallies. If you hung around any message board, you were likely to come across a Libertarian espousing the virtues of limited government and less economic control from "central bankers." This sentiment usually reeked of conspiratorial thinking that usually sanitized historical accusations of "secret cabals" of "international bankers" manipulating markets and regulations. Contrast this with the overwhelming popular election of the nations first black president, and you can begin to view a picture of white male insecurity suddenly concerned with rising inflation and the collapse of the dollar at the hands of a minority president who would surely use his power and influence to redirect wealth to undesirables (minorities). Of course, that never happened, but the sentiment prevailed and the result was the most reactionary and right-wing presidential campaign in modern US history that led to the birth of a burgeoning nationalist and nativisit movement that culminated in a literal failed attempt to ransack and overthrow the government.
The point is, while the technology of digitizing currency might be an inevitability, currency itself cannot exist without the direct support of the state, as the state is the only institution that has granted itself the ability to use violence as a means of greasing the wheels of capitalism, vis-a-vis state-sanctioned violence against the underclass in the interest of the propertied class, and/or via the suppression of the labor pool that creates the surplus value of "profit" that underpins capitalism to begin with. The folly of Bitcoin and all crypto currencies (and libertarian thinking at large) is the belief that value is inherent and determined by demand, rather than the understanding that "value" or "profit" is actually generated by labor (i.e, the workers). And this is quite evident in the literal pyramid structure of the entire crypto ecosystem, where the value of the asset is only really determined by the number of "investors" at the bottom of the pyramid, and not directly tied to any form of productivity.
It's Mickey Mouse, mate. Spurious. Not Genuine.
for once, a rant worth reading.
+++
I'll quibble over sematics before making more general comments. 'Left' and 'right' are overly broad political categorizations that reflect and promote the illusion of the bifurcation of the state. (Without getting bogged down on this point, the most recognizable feature of the illusion of bifurcation is the failure of the two party system to address any of the needs of the general population).
When someone talks about left / right the assumption is that they are talking talking about Dem / Rep. This is inane as more voters are registered as independent than either party. Thus 'left and right' by definition excludes the largest political group. I find more defiinitive terminology such as progressive, conservative, etc. avoids this kind of broadly associative labeling and is more descriptive of actual political leanings.
As to libertarianism, it's principle claim of anti-violence is contradicted by its willful adoption of economic violence, in particular its stand against all social programs. Letting people starve to death or suffer and die from the lack of health care is "freedom". This is essentially anarchism without physical violence.
One thumbs up is not enough.
Luke Weidner,
Cryptocurrency is like "stock" except you are not owning anything. It like the unregulated currencies or special notes that used to be issued by banks before we had an established standard currency and so the value of these notes is really just a glorified IOU from the certificate issuer that you traded say.... so many ounces of gold for some number of these note (an exchange) which can either go in your favor or it doesn't. Except it's totally unregulated. Since many of these systems of the 19th century doesn't exist anymore when banking institutions began to be more regulated and these kinds of things are no longer 'legal tender'. As an alternative to this, people then went into buying stocks and they get a percentage of interest in companies. When the companies grow in value, their financial interest goes. Mechanically, it all works fundamentally the same other than the technical mechanics. The principle is people are operating cryptocurrency as the new "stock market" game where historically, the game is to buy stocks when the price per stock is low, and sell when it is high.... you gain wealth. They do EXACTLY that with cryptocurrency. It's about buying low.... selling high and your gain is in the difference......provide you don't have to wait so long that the inflation rate of fully legally recognized currency outpaced your gain ratio.
The legality of cryptocurrency is something that is still being contested and it's only a matter of time when governments establish a government ruling system regulating cryptocurrency because once they put the quantum computer online (which governments will have access to and through national security acts and similar provisions and a military force to back it....keep you from legally owning such a computer because governments only exist to control the subjects. The U.S. government as with all governments exists to control the people ruled and controlled by special privileged interests. Always..... a few in control of everyone else. It is how humans operate and how humans govern. This is the limit of our genetic capacity. To evolve beyond this means we are no longer human. It's genetically impossible yet we think it's going to be possible to be any different. Fundamental flaws of our nature is that we are selfish and because of it, we can't establish a lasting viable government where the people rule and are not ruled by what is nothing more than a special privileged 'cabal'. These interests aren't interested in equally sharing the wealth of the world.
I'm skeptical of cryptocurrency and do not hold high regards of human nature and even less the institutions that are biproducts of human nature.
*long sigh*