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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (136993)	12/10/2017 2:47:38 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217683

My initial criticism of bitcoin when it was first announced in competition with my sensible, rational, efficient unit of value was that bitcoin was an energy waster [while some entropy creation is an annoying fact of life, minimizing it is a good thing]. It was also defective in requiring obsolete information to be carted around forever [linked to the previous problem]. I also thought it was not going to be quick enough. So it has turned out to be. Also, adoption and issue was not linked to Metcalfe's law aka network effects so over half of it has been issued although almost nobody owns any bitcoin. Another problems is the fork problem where it splits and can do so any number of times. And there are also many competitors. But one useful thing has been proven by bitcoin and that was the dopey idea by apparently all experts in monetary theory that value had to first be defined in real terms such as gold, silver, land, eggs, sea shells or something material. I claimed that idea was false and that a unit of value could be produced from thin air. I have now been proven to be right and the experts once again wrong. Bitcoin at over $200 billion is a LOT of value. Mqurice