 |
October 04, 2012, 08:12:57 PM
Last edit: October 05, 2012, 01:11:41 AM by franky1 |
|
great read, which highlights a few old things on different topics.
im actually laughing at how people think bitcoin isnt centralised.
when one entity is the powerhouse controlling the value of a commodity then it becomes centralised. for instance.. most people base BTC value on mtgox prices.
centralisation and tyranny are different things.. centralisation is in fiat terms.. the national reserve and banks. tyranny is the government and its financial laws and taxes.
in btc terms centralisation is trade exchange sites setting the value. tyranny is ... well hopefully no one..
if you truly want to be decentralised. then forget the US dollar conversion prices of MTGOX when purchasing. and when someone sells an item u pay what you think is a fair amount based purely on how much TIME you spent earning that BTC.
eg if you work all week earning fiat you already have an understanding that a percentage of your weekly income equals your food bill.. so if working all day ends up as enough currency to go to a bar get as drunk as you can and buy a fastfood meal at the end of the evening then thats what you expect to get for the amount of bitcoin you can mine in a day.
go back to the medieval days, when a butcher would carve up a healthy size beef steak which took him 30 minutes to prepare in exchange for 30 minutes time with a prostitute.. as an example.
the use of gold and then later FIAT was a centralised method to balance value, to make it a fair comparison so trades became equal for both parties.
tyranny is the other subject. i like how bitcoins are not solely owned by EG mtgox, etc ( and although i use them as a fair value comparison when trading) i know they cannot control my use of it, unlike governments do with FIAT.
after reading the article im just wondering about legality of bitcoins (specifically bitpay, MTGOX BTC-E and other exchanges) in regards to "unlicensed money transmitting business" laws.
|
