Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Dino's Bar & Grill -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Goose94 who wrote (32436)	8/2/2017 9:59:38 AM
From: Goose94	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 204570

Bitcoin: Crypto-currencies are mirroring pre-crash banking systems When bitcoin, the crypto currency, first arrived on the scene in 2009 it sold itself on a simple principle. Unlike central bank money, the supply of which could be expanded on the whim of a non-democratically elected committee, bitcoin's supply would remain capped at 21 million coins at any cost. This would be effected by way of a decentralised protocol, making it theoretically impossible for any single authority to override or control it. This, ultimately, was bitcoin's promise to the world: a currency manufactured and supported by the users for the users, which no single entity could manipulate, and which no third party was required to intermediate. Understandably the pledge appealed most to those who might describe themselves as hard-money enthusiasts. Their view was that uncontrolled money creation was the probable cause of most economic instability in the world and must therefore be constrained. Bitcoin offered them the perfect conduit for this vision. More than eight years after bitcoin's arrival, most of these principles have fallen by the wayside. Bitcoin spawned a litany of copycat systems -- each with its own profiteering opportunity for early adopters. It no longer matters, for example, that the system is being engulfed by rogue and untethered private-money creation. Nor does it seem to matter that it's been a long time since bitcoin could be honestly described as a decentralised system, free of intermediaries. Economies of scale, as is their habit, have ensured only a handful of professional mining outfits and pools control the bitcoin production scene -- they can collude oligopolistically if they want. What matters is that the crypto scene's popularity and profitability are soaring, especially for those who have become the new bitcoin power elite. Even bitcoin is succumbing to the pressure. As of Tuesday a bitter ideological dispute over how the protocol should scale in the future has led to a breakaway version of the original currency. Because of the way bitcoin is designed, if this breakaway copy gains traction with miners, corporations and users -- something we could know within a few hours or days -- it could immediately expand bitcoin's lifetime money supply to 42 million from 21 million. Dubbed "bitcoin cash," this money-creating breakaway ironically owes its existence to the more puritanical part of the community, who insist that replica bitcoin systems (known as sidechains) should never be allowed to tie themselves to the core system without limit; that would replicate the conventional and inflationary banking system. Unsurprisingly, it is the miners, corporations, and intermediaries who support these sidechains: Only by forgoing some of their core principles can they remain profitable in this sector. Bitcoin purists tend to be the staunchest critics of the expanded crypto scene, pointing out that almost every day a new token or coin is being issued into the market on the flawed assumption that full convertibility and liquidity can be guaranteed. Today's crypto system is beginning to replicate the pre-crisis financial system of the United Kingdom, when banks -- as long as they had acceptable assets to pledge at the central bank -- could receive whatever official liquidity they demanded. For everything else, such as self-created assets, there was the wholesale funding market. We know many of these assets were self-valued at entirely fantastical rates. When the wholesale market froze up, only the central bank had the capacity to support them. The purists understand that the crypto scene will not have that saving grace. That makes the bitcoin fork a judgment-of-Solomon moment. Only a decisive win by either side will prevent bitcoin from splitting itself apart. Who, if anyone, gives way in the event of a standoff will be a telling indicator of what really motivates the community. By Izabella Kaminska Financial Times, London Tuesday, August 1, 2017