Key Post Bitcoin is a clearly identifiable economic bubble

[time to plan]

The statement was that money has NO fraud protection, which is different from what you're saying.

 

[tecate]

The statement was that money has NO fraud protection, which is different from what you're saying.

There were a couple of sentences on the subject ->
"What fraud protection does cash have? zero. I could simply take it off you. I could pass you fake cash. My point is that we've been using money that has no fraud protection for an age already."

Leave the two sentences together within the context that they were intended - and I'm saying that cash has no fraud protection. I'm not sure how there's any confusion as I then went on to talk about a specific form of money that does have fraud protection. But no matter - I'm happy to clear that up for you.

 

[Firefly]

I don't believe that any money that you can self-custody has more fraud protection than bitcoin does. How does a 50 euro note for example have more fraud protection?

 

[time to plan]

There were a couple of sentences on the subject ->
"What fraud protection does cash have? zero. I could simply take it off you. I could pass you fake cash. My point is that we've been using money that has no fraud protection for an age already."

Leave the two sentences together within the context that they were intended - and I'm saying that cash has no fraud protection. I'm not sure how there's any

Security features

Feel, Look, Tilt: Learn about the security features of euro banknotes and detect counterfeits at a glance.

www.ecb.europa.eu

 

[tecate]

@time to plan : Three quarters of an hour ago, you responded to @DazedInPontoon that his example of a 50 euro note not having any fraud protection was a completely different point. I came back and clarified that it was precisely the point I was making. Have you changed your mind?

I believe that there's a difference between 'security features' and 'fraud protection' such that there is a system in place to make the user whole again where fraud has occurred. I'm confident that the critique that @argolis referenced was referring to the latter (as I've listened to the chatter on that subject from the group that voiced that criticism in the past).

If you'd like to make a comparison between cash and bitcoin on the basis of counterfeiting, then bitcoin wins hands down in that it's virtually impossible to be counterfeited.

 

[time to plan]

@time to plan : Three quarters of an hour ago, you responded to @DazedInPontoon that his example of a 50 euro note not having any fraud protection was a completely different point. I came back and clarified that it was precisely the point I was making. Have you changed your mind?

I believe that there's a difference between 'security features' and 'fraud protection' such that there is a system in place to make the user whole again where fraud has occurred. I'm confident that the critique that @argolis referenced was referring to the latter (as I've listened to the chatter on that subject from the group in the past).

If you'd like to make a comparison between cash and bitcoin on the basis of counterfeiting, then bitcoin wins hands down.

Goodness you are confused.

You said money has no fraud protection.

DazedinPontoon didn't say a 50 Euro note has no fraud protection. DazedinPontoon said 'I don't believe that any money that you can self-custody has more fraud protection than bitcoin does.'

You were making an absolute statement about money. DazedinPontoon was comparing money to Bitcoin.

Now you are saying that security features are different from fraud protection having previously given the example of 'I could pass you fake cash' as an argument within the context of a discussion about fraud protection. Even so, I expect you would agree that security features are a protection against forgery and that intent to defraud is a component of forgery.

And finally, you are now looking to compare cash with Bitcoin.

I simply asked whether you honestly believe that money has NO fraud protection?

Even by cryptozealot standards, your confusion is remarkable! But most entertaining on a quiet work morning,

 

[tecate]

You said money has no fraud protection. . .You were making an absolute statement about money.

Of course that's entirely incorrect. It was incorrect even before I went to the trouble of teasing it out for you in posts #703 & #706.

Now you are saying that security features are different from fraud protection having previously given the example of 'I could pass you fake cash' as an argument within the context of a discussion about fraud protection.

I've clearly stated that the critique that @argolis cited was referring to 'fraud protection' in terms of the protection that something like a credit card provides - in making the user whole in the case of fraud occurring. I know this as I've followed discussion involving that group of people.
I then clarified that Bitcoin is peer to peer money - and in that respect it's far more like cash. When i referred to the possibility of taking cash from a user by force or passing off fake cash, I'm listing those as examples where there is no 'fraud protection' to the extent that someone is going to make that cash user whole again in those circumstances.

And finally, you are now looking to compare cash with Bitcoin.

What's this 'now' business? From the outset, I was pointing at the similarities between bitcoin and cash and how they don't have the same 'fraud protection' that money spent via a credit card does.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

@tecate your post #699 was largely above my pay grade. However the following bit jumped out:

Does a product like this facilitate someone like me - who is paid monthly in BTC to do so feasibly on a day to day basis?

Now I have a couple of very simple clarifications to request and please don't rant down the Unit of Account rabbit hole.
1. Do you agree a month in advance the bitcoin value of your services irrespective of how its dollar exchange rate move?
2. If the answer to (1) is "Yes" then as a a supplementary are your fees/charges relatively stable month on month in bitcoin terms, irrespective of the BTC/$US exchange rate?

 

[tecate]

Now I have a couple of very simple clarifications to request and please don't rant down the Unit of Account rabbit hole.
1. Do you agree a month in advance the bitcoin value of your services irrespective of how its dollar exchange rate move?
2. If the answer to (1) is "Yes" then as a a supplementary are your fees/charges relatively stable month on month in bitcoin terms, irrespective of the BTC/$US exchange rate?

Services were priced and agreed in dollars. Payment is made in BTC equivalent as per the market rate at the time of invoicing.

As for your follow up question, I'm not living in the US and I'm not living in a country that uses the USD as its currency. Clearly, if I was paid in USD and living within an economy that uses its own monopoly money, then there's FX risk. Recently, I've come across reports from Americans living and working in Europe (and earning in Euro) but with mortgages, student loans and other commitments in USD back in the US - and naturally, they've got a very difficult adjustment to make right now (with the Euro having lost 20% of its value in the space of 12 months).

It's the same in my case with Bitcoin. Of course, you will point to the greater volatility. Sure, that's sub-optimal. However, I'm not living hand to mouth. I very much understand Bitcoin's volatility and I'm in a position to accommodate it - over the longer stretch. I'd imagine that the 250 other folks who are either employed by said company or contract to them and receive payment in Bitcoin have an equal understanding.

That may not be ideal for everyone - just like receiving payment in USD and having bills in EUR/GBP/PESOS/YEN, etc. may work with you or against you at any given time. The point is that you have to make allowances and have a contingency plan for the FX risk in these cases. It's no different with Bitcoin.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Services were priced and agreed in dollars. Payment is made in BTC equivalent as per the market rate at the time of invoicing.

As for your follow up question, I'm not living in the US and I'm not living in a country that uses the USD as its currency. Clearly, if I was paid in USD and living within an economy that uses its own monopoly money, then there's FX risk. Recently, I've come across reports from Americans living and working in Europe (and earning in Euro) but with mortgages, student loans and other commitments in USD back in the US - and naturally, they've got a very difficult adjustment to make right now (with the Euro having lost 20% of its value in the space of 12 months).

It's the same in my case with Bitcoin. Of course, you will point to the greater volatility. Sure, that's sub-optimal. However, I'm not living hand to mouth. I very much understand Bitcoin's volatility and I'm in a position to accommodate it - over the longer stretch. I'd imagine that the 250 other folks who are either employed by said company or contract to them and receive payment in Bitcoin have an equal understanding.

That may not be ideal for everyone - just like receiving payment in USD and having bills in EUR/GBP/PESOS/YEN, etc. may work with you or against you at any given time. The point is that you have to make allowances and have a contingency plan for the FX risk in these cases. It's no different with Bitcoin.

Okay. Not sure I fully understand your answer.
It seems that the charge for your services are relatively stable in US$ terms.
However there is a bitcoin exposure in the delay between invoice date and settlement. However, it is an exposure which your patron could hedge and make sure his/her expenditure is all predictable in US$ terms.
It looks to me like a contrivance to satisfy your bitcoin fetish but that the real economic activity is in US$. Call it Unit of Account if you like.

 

[DazedInPontoon]

Even if you're paid in euro you need a contingency plan in case the euro devalues relatively quickly against essential goods, as has been happening this year.

 

[tecate]

However there is a bitcoin exposure in the delay between invoice date and settlement.

I don't know what you mean. I invoice and they settle immediately. Naturally, I have Bitcoin 'exposure' as I take payment in Bitcoin. That's my own affair. I could convert it immediately to monopoly money if I wanted to.

it is an exposure which your patron could hedge and make sure his/her expenditure is all predictable in US$ terms.

I don't know what you're speculating on here - and I'm not sure that we could or should go there - as I can only speak for myself and not for them. The little that I do know is that they're likely to have little costs associated with USD or any other sovereign currency. Their revenues are largely in crypto insofar as I'm aware.

It looks to me like a contrivance to satisfy your bitcoin fetish but that the real economic activity is in US$. Call it Unit of Account if you like.

The contrivance is all yours (to satisfy your ideological opposition to the development of BTC). I have an option - contract to that company and get paid in BTC or go fish. I was never going to ask as I see it as a feature and benefit - but at the time of initial discussions, they made it quite clear that there would be no other payment option.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Even if you're paid in euro you need a contingency plan in case the euro devalues relatively quickly against essential goods, as has been happening this year.

And your point is?
Even at 8% p.a. inflation we should note that the price of a latte in bitcoin will move by over 8% on most weeks.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

I don't know what you mean. I invoice and they settle immediately. Naturally, I have Bitcoin 'exposure' as I take payment in Bitcoin. That's my own affair. I could convert it immediately to monopoly money if I wanted to.

So it is first and last an economic US$ transaction. The silly nonsense of settling the transaction in another medium (I won't use the misnomer "currency") appears to at the behest of your patron (see apology below).

I don't know what you're speculating on here - and I'm not sure that we could or should go there - as I can only speak for myself and not for them. The little that I do know is that they're likely to have little costs associated with USD or any other sovereign currency.

I thought it was like the usual arrangement where an Invoice typically gives 30 days grace for settlement. I was "speculating" that your patron could hedge the US$/BTC exchange rate risk for that period. But the point is irrelevant as there appears to be no period of grace for settlement.

Their revenues are largely in crypto insofar as I'm aware.

There you go again. Are their revenues in their primary economic form in crypto or, as with their expenditure, are they in US$ with a conversion to crypto at the point of settlement? If it is the case that their revenues are genuinely in crypto whilst there expenditure is fundamentally in US$ then I might be able to assist them in managing what is clearly a huge exchange rate risk.

The contrivance is all yours (to satisfy your ideological opposition to the development of BTC). I have an option - contract to that company and get paid in BTC or go fish.

I was never going to ask as I see it as a feature and benefit - but at the time of initial discussions, they made it quite clear that there would be no other payment option.

Ahh! So it is your patron that insists on the contrivance. Apologies for putting it down to your cultist obsession.

 

[tecate]

So it is first and last an economic US$ transaction. The silly nonsense of settling the transaction in another medium (I won't use the misnomer "currency") appears to at the behest of your patron (see apology below).

First transaction? Unit of account is not a transaction! I couldn't give a fiddlers about unit of account. The unit of account can be in west african francs - I couldn't give a fiddlers. You're caught up in your own ideology in making that a thing.

I thought it was like the usual arrangement where an Invoice typically gives 30 days grace for settlement. I was "speculating" that your patron could hedge the US$/BTC exchange rate risk for that period. But the point is irrelevant as there appears to be no period of grace for settlement.

That's not the case. I present my invoice and invoice is settled within an hour or two.

Are their revenues in their primary economic form in crypto or, as with their expenditure, are they in US$ with a conversion to crypto at the point of settlement? If it is the case that their revenues are genuinely in crypto whilst there expenditure is fundamentally in US$ then I might be able to assist them in managing what is clearly a huge exchange rate risk.

Re-read what I wrote. I specifically said that their revenues are in crypto. Not dollars, not euro or anything else - they're natively in crypto.

Ahh! So it is your patron that insists on the contrivance. Apologies for putting it down to your cultist obsession.

lol I suppose I have to repeat myself. The contrivance is yours based on an opposition that is ideological and not pragmatic in any way, shape or form.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Re-read what I wrote. I specifically said that their revenues are in crypto. Not dollars, not euro or anything else - they're natively in crypto.

Just checking. You originally said you were paid in bitcoin. It transpires that you are paid in US$.

 

[tecate]

Just checking. You originally said you were paid in bitcoin. It transpires that you are paid in US$.

You're hung up on unit of account. So this company and I agreed a rate based on USD as a unit of account. They have not sourced USD, they have not paid me in USD. All that has passed from them to me is BTC - via a transfer on the Bitcoin network. I have no reason to believe that they went out and bought bitcoin with USD prior to paying me (in fact, I have every reason to believe that they simply reallocate Bitcoin generated directly in revenue by the company on a day to day basis).

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

You're hung up on unit of account. So this company and I agreed a rate based on USD as a unit of account. They have not sourced USD, they have not paid me in USD. All that has passed from them to me is BTC - via a transfer on the Bitcoin network. I have no reason to believe that they went out and bought bitcoin with USD prior to paying me (in fact, I have every reason to believe that they simply reallocate Bitcoin generated directly in revenue by the company on a day to day basis).

You have already told me that the economic basis of the transaction was the US$; it doesn't matter a hoot if you decided to settle your arrangement in beads at an agreed exchange rate. Let's get out of this rabbit hole.

 

[tecate]

You have already told me that the economic basis of the transaction was the US$; it doesn't matter a hoot if you decided to settle your arrangement in beads at an agreed exchange rate. Let's get out of this rabbit hole.

This is hilarious. You're trying to tell the world that I'm not getting paid in Bitcoin when I am. You're now trying to muster some sort of justification for saying "you were paid in USD" by going on about some nonsense about "economic basis". Get out of it, Duke.

I've told you many times - unit of account doesn't make a blind bit of difference. Bitcoin not being a unit of account counts for nothing. I don't have any ambition for Bitcoin ever to be a unit of account - I couldn't care less. You do because you believe that this is a black/white deal i.e. bitcoin wins or fiat wins. It's not going to work like that - they will both exist side by side - and people will have the optionality to use whatever suits their needs at a given time.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

This is hilarious. You're trying to tell the world that I'm not getting paid in Bitcoin when I am. You're now trying to muster some sort of justification for saying "you were paid in USD" by going on about some nonsense about "economic basis". Get out of it, Duke.

I've told you many times - unit of account doesn't make a blind bit of difference. Bitcoin not being a unit of account counts for nothing. I don't have any ambition for Bitcoin ever to be a unit of account - I couldn't care less. You do because you believe that this is a black/white deal i.e. bitcoin wins or fiat wins. It's not going to work like that - they will both exist side by side - and people will have the optionality to use whatever suits their needs at a given time.

As usual you keep digging the rabbit hole. I don't know what you do but let us assume for sake of argument that you are the Tea Lady. My understanding of your commercial arrangement is that you agree to provide the tea for the next month for, let's say, $1,000. At the end of the month you agree to settle with your patron for the then BTC/US$ exchange rate. If you believe that protects the purity of your cult credentials, I am not trying to undermine your Faith. But for me you work for US$. End of.