pull down to refresh
46 sats \ 1 reply \ @SpaceHodler 12h \ parent \ on: 5 Thoughts On How A Bitcoin Backed Strike Loan Changed My Finance Habits econ
Strike loans don't create new money. It's money already in existence.
That said, creating more fiat is good for the world, because it's bad for fiat.
The survey also asked whether people trust their own country, the European Union, the U.S. and China to regulate the use of AI effectively.
Funny formulation, I wouldn't even know what is being asked.
If you asked me "Are you concerned that governments will regulate it?", that would make much more sense.
Yes, those who understand the difference are a 1% minority.
They'll read the headline and think the point of Bitcoin is skulduggery.
It's interesting how speculators' money can benefit society, sometimes even when they lose.
It has parallels with how prediction markets provide information (= a public good).
Why would they even have to comply with BS EU laws if they're based in the US?
It's like that old Monty Python sketch... "To fix Britain, let's tax all Chinese people living in China."
They don't even get revenue from ads, almost all of it is from donations and they accept BTC, so there is nothing the EU can do.
And if the EU orders ISPs to block the domain, there are VPNs and Signal could build in Tor support.
How are they going to enforce this?
Does it only apply to Google Play apps? Or are they going to add enforcement to Android itself (which can be forked and the enforcement removed)?
My last time was Avatar at IMAX. Maybe 2009 or early 2010.
Other that that it's been torrents and streaming services. But not much lately, as I'm more interested in videos and books.
To receive sats (horse badge) you just need to specify an LN address.
To send sats (gun badge) requires sharing a secret or a similar setup, as otherwise anyone could pull sats out of your wallet.
It also changes the way you hear music. You start noticing things non-musicians don't notice.
Musical training often involves ear training, which makes you notice chords, intervals etc.
Looks like it's going to use data they already have anyway, and the only new data you provide comes from the bit that says "by letting it know what’s useful and what isn’t".
I was sending some Good Boy Points from my bank account to an exchange to buy corn.
They asked me what it was for. I refused to answer, because I thought it was none of their business. They blocked the transfer and told me "Call us back when you change your mind."
Later that day I walked into a branch and the same conversation repeated. Eventually I told them it was for "drugs and hookers" and they let it through.
SWIFT is not an MoE use case, it's remittances and Bitcoin can and does compete with that already.
I brought up SoV, because that's what will lead to the hyperinflation and ultimately destruction of fiat.
Fiat printing doesn't work when there is no incentive to hold fiat.
Bitcoin will become more of an MoE when people start asking to be paid in BTC (i.e. when Thiers' law kicks in). By that time, the state will be so weak, taxing imaginary "capital gains" will be unenforceable.
Bitcoin does provide some healthy competition for the fiat monetary monopoly but only where fiat debt capital issuance is being misused and abused
Bitcoin provides unbeatable competition for fiat if it's a practical SoV (MoE is not relevant here) and fiat doesn't have a fixed supply, which it never will.
For fiat money to operate successfully you need sufficiently disciplined and honest government and bankers in place to operate such a fiat debt leverage economic model- where those exist is can and demonstrably has worked well historically- where those are absent as in the west today, it can work to cause much damage.
You also need either for Bitcoin to not exist, or people not to want to buy it.
Because fiat printing can't work when there is something to dump it for and demand as payment.
Currently there are enough people not wanting to buy bitcoin, but that's not going to last forever.
Conclusion: fiat is unsustainable.
The main argument I hear is that fiat stimulates innovation, because businesses can borrow it cheaply, and on a Bitcoin standard they wouldn't be able to borrow. They say businesses need to be able to borrow money cheaply and fail.
I don't quite see why for there to be innovation, entrepreneurs who call themselves innovative need the right to 'steal' from other parts of the economy.
It's effectively a call to subsidize some things at the cost of others.
Fiat defenders also bring up historical correlation between increases in gold supply and periods of economic growth. I don't know how to respond to that.