LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Securing a wallet has always been one of the aspects of Bitcoin that put me off and made it harder for bitcoin to become a usable currency. The recent hardware wallet creations have gone a long to solving this issue.bompington said:Another great feature that quite a few people are in despair over is the ability to lose either your password or the physical storage... assuming that a finite proportion of bitcoin holders do this every year, there will eventually be simply no bitcoins left.
During one of the booms a few years ago I met a few investors in crypto currencies in the pub. I asked how they were securing their wallet, but they didn't even understand the question which was quite worrying given the size of their investment.0 -
It is not clear to me what problem it is attempting to solve.
It is far too volatile to use as a normal currency, it uses a gigantic amount of energy and it seems to be used almost exclusively by either criminals, scam artists posing as exchanges (to nick your money) or muppet investors.1 -
Decentralised currency free from state intervention, so people like @surrey_commuter don't need to worry about governments constantly minting money. It is thought that Satoshi Nakamoto was miffed with Japanese government constantly doing this.rick_chasey said:It is not clear to me what problem it is attempting to solve.
It is far too volatile to use as a normal currency, it uses a gigantic amount of energy and it seems to be used almost exclusively by either criminals, scam artists posing as exchanges (to nick your money) or muppet investors.
It also works seamlessly across borders.
The idea is quite brilliant, and the way it was all thought through in one white paper is amazing.
Satoshi Nakamoto has still not used a single one of his million coins.0 -
-
I should add I have followed bitcoin mainly through FT Alphaville, who take a fairly sneery approach.
They spend a lot of time looking at it and from what I've gleaned the crypto world spend a lot of time aping the kind of things you see in conventional currencies, but usually due to lack of regulation (well, until Ripple got done by the SEC for, amongst other things, trying to act like a central bank....), make a quick buck by scamming people, and employ hoards of online bots and trolls to harass high profile critics.
0 -
Essentially, bitcoin has all the benefits, and all the drawbacks, of anarchy.0
-
Problem is government constantly devalues your currency by printing new money.rick_chasey said:Right but why is this a problem?
Isn't Satoshi Nakamoto a pseudonym for someone still unknown?
Yes, it is an unknown person/group.0 -
And yet, large banks and government are looking to create their own.rick_chasey said:I should add I have followed bitcoin mainly through FT Alphaville, who take a fairly sneery approach.
They spend a lot of time looking at it and from what I've gleaned the crypto world spend a lot of time aping the kind of things you see in conventional currencies, but usually due to lack of regulation (well, until Ripple got done by the SEC for, amongst other things, trying to act like a central bank....), make a quick buck by scamming people, and employ hoards of online bots and trolls to harass high profile critics.
There are a lot of worthless new alternative coins, and there are, of course, a lot of scammers. It's not really much different to a gold rush, and just like a gold rush, the gold is worth something.
0 -
Good analogy. More people got rich selling pick axes than striking gold.TheBigBean said:
And yet, large banks and government are looking to create their own.rick_chasey said:I should add I have followed bitcoin mainly through FT Alphaville, who take a fairly sneery approach.
They spend a lot of time looking at it and from what I've gleaned the crypto world spend a lot of time aping the kind of things you see in conventional currencies, but usually due to lack of regulation (well, until Ripple got done by the SEC for, amongst other things, trying to act like a central bank....), make a quick buck by scamming people, and employ hoards of online bots and trolls to harass high profile critics.
There are a lot of worthless new alternative coins, and there are, of course, a lot of scammers. It's not really much different to a gold rush, and just like a gold rush, the gold is worth something.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Yes that was my point, and despite all that, gold is still actually worth something today whereas $20k kittens are long gone.pblakeney said:
Good analogy. More people got rich selling pick axes than striking gold.TheBigBean said:
And yet, large banks and government are looking to create their own.rick_chasey said:I should add I have followed bitcoin mainly through FT Alphaville, who take a fairly sneery approach.
They spend a lot of time looking at it and from what I've gleaned the crypto world spend a lot of time aping the kind of things you see in conventional currencies, but usually due to lack of regulation (well, until Ripple got done by the SEC for, amongst other things, trying to act like a central bank....), make a quick buck by scamming people, and employ hoards of online bots and trolls to harass high profile critics.
There are a lot of worthless new alternative coins, and there are, of course, a lot of scammers. It's not really much different to a gold rush, and just like a gold rush, the gold is worth something.
0 -
Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.0 -
What I don't understand about him is his comment from 2018 - "The only way that I can see to deploy this much financial resource is by converting my Amazon winnings into space travel."rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
Surely, surely, if he's not saving up for anything in particular, he could think of something more inventive than that.0 -
I tend to agree but I find the comparisons to how long it would take people to get there on normal salaries a bit pointless. Obviously he didn't achieve it by being an employee anywhere.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Funnily enough, the book seller turned logistics and tax legend lacks imagination.kingstongraham said:
What I don't understand about him is his comment from 2018 - "The only way that I can see to deploy this much financial resource is by converting my Amazon winnings into space travel."rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
Surely, surely, if he's not saving up for anything in particular, he could think of something more inventive than that.0 -
TheBigBean said:
Yes that was my point, and despite all that, gold is still actually worth something today whereas $20k kittens are long gone.pblakeney said:
Good analogy. More people got rich selling pick axes than striking gold.TheBigBean said:
And yet, large banks and government are looking to create their own.rick_chasey said:I should add I have followed bitcoin mainly through FT Alphaville, who take a fairly sneery approach.
They spend a lot of time looking at it and from what I've gleaned the crypto world spend a lot of time aping the kind of things you see in conventional currencies, but usually due to lack of regulation (well, until Ripple got done by the SEC for, amongst other things, trying to act like a central bank....), make a quick buck by scamming people, and employ hoards of online bots and trolls to harass high profile critics.
There are a lot of worthless new alternative coins, and there are, of course, a lot of scammers. It's not really much different to a gold rush, and just like a gold rush, the gold is worth something.
Another today. Far from eliminating fraud in the financial system, cryptos enable it.1 -
That misses the point.rick_chasey said:0 -
Unsurprisingly I don’t begrudge him a penny.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
I would never be that rich as I would quit before I even had £100m0 -
Or at least sign up to the Giving Pledge like all the other gazzilionaires. I looked at that the other day (wife was watching something about John Cauldwell's ridiculously expensive, tacky and ostentatious "house" in Mayfair) and worked out that in giving away 99% of his wealth Buffet would still be left with something like $850 million so I think he will get by! I really don't understand the obesession of billionaires with space but that comment may go some way to explaining it along with just the sheer ego thing.kingstongraham said:
What I don't understand about him is his comment from 2018 - "The only way that I can see to deploy this much financial resource is by converting my Amazon winnings into space travel."rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
Surely, surely, if he's not saving up for anything in particular, he could think of something more inventive than that.0 -
If he wanted to thank those who have helped him, he could give every Amazon employee $100,000 and still get by on the leftover $141billion.
Might not be great for retention, but maybe it would if he gave one in a thousand employees a $1,000,000 bonus once a year at random. That would cost him about 0.3% of his wealth each year.0 -
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
0 -
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.
0 -
Just because they don't have a serious rival doesn't make them monopolistic. It's just the competitors e.g. Wish are a bit rubbish. I ordered from them on Wednesday afternoon and received the product within a couple of hours, no-one else provides that service but I'm not aware of anything Amazon are doing to prevent them from doing so. They also had to build to where they are, it's not like they just dropped in ready formed. From memory they were mainly books and DVDs to start with.rick_chasey said:
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.0 -
Like I said, I don't begrudge the success. That they can be so successful (and have the founder earn quite so much - roughly the total earnings of the entirety of qatar for a year) suggests they are not run as efficiently as they could.Pross said:
Just because they don't have a serious rival doesn't make them monopolistic. It's just the competitors e.g. Wish are a bit rubbish. I ordered from them on Wednesday afternoon and received the product within a couple of hours, no-one else provides that service but I'm not aware of anything Amazon are doing to prevent them from doing so. They also had to build to where they are, it's not like they just dropped in ready formed. From memory they were mainly books and DVDs to start with.rick_chasey said:
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.
This is due to a lack of competition.
You can't blame Amazon and Jeff for wanting to make as much money as possible.
But the conditions of the market are such amazon can get away with doing that.0 -
I placed my first order on Amazon for a book on 19/04/2002. I can't even remember reading the book but wish I'd bought some shares in the upcoming company.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
rick_chasey said:
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.
The nature of modern commerce is that the smart early creators/adopters of new models often seem to be rewarded with quasi monopolies (or cartels). Not sure how you deal with that, globally.0 -
Yep, my only disagreement is that I don't see them as a monopoly in the true sense, just that they do what they do so well that no other company can get a foothold at a level to be considered competition. For me, a monopoly implies competition is being prevented by something e.g. regulation. I don't necessarily think it is a good thing that they have no serious competition though.rick_chasey said:
Like I said, I don't begrudge the success. That they can be so successful (and have the founder earn quite so much - roughly the total earnings of the entirety of qatar for a year) suggests they are not run as efficiently as they could.Pross said:
Just because they don't have a serious rival doesn't make them monopolistic. It's just the competitors e.g. Wish are a bit rubbish. I ordered from them on Wednesday afternoon and received the product within a couple of hours, no-one else provides that service but I'm not aware of anything Amazon are doing to prevent them from doing so. They also had to build to where they are, it's not like they just dropped in ready formed. From memory they were mainly books and DVDs to start with.rick_chasey said:
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.
This is due to a lack of competition.
You can't blame Amazon and Jeff for wanting to make as much money as possible.
But the conditions of the market are such amazon can get away with doing that.0 -
I think you just rely on them sitting on their laurels and others coming up with something more innovative. Google has become synonymous with search engines as their main rivals just aren't very good and are gradually moving into other areas. Think back 20 years and all the grief Gates and Microsoft were getting regarding internet access due to their dominance of the OS market. Advocates of Apple seemed very vocal yet 10 years later when Apple were dominating they didn't seem so bothered.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:
So who is a serious rival to amazon? I would consider their position monopolistic.Pross said:
Is that really the case with him though? It feels more like he got ahead of the game seeing how things were going and whilst there are other online retailers Amazon is the first port of call for most. They have also kept ahead of the game.rick_chasey said:Tried to explain to the wife why a) i don't begrudge jeff bazos success but b) I see his ridiculous wealth as a structural failure in a market (as you only get that wealthy through monopolistic behaviour or exploitation) and that ideally you want the market playing field such that no-one can get in such a dominant position.
Did not succeed and was called "Corbyn like". Humph.
It is mad. Would take me over a million years at current earnings to get to his.
They use their size and scale to muscle governments into avoiding paying tax - given their revenue and profits they pay remarkably little tax.
They have used a number of local regulatory labour loopholes to pay their staff amazingly little for the work they do.
The nature of modern commerce is that the smart early creators/adopters of new models often seem to be rewarded with quasi monopolies (or cartels). Not sure how you deal with that, globally.
However, if you look back at older technologies there are loads of examples of once dominant companies now being virtual non-entities think IBM in the PC market, Ericsson or Nokia in mobile phones, Hoover in vacuum cleaners then there are all the retailers like M&S or the Arcadia group (it's even harder to stay ahead of the field in that sector).0 -
What's Amazon's USP these days anyway? I feel like they it has gone downhill. For any given item you typically get a range of thousands of fake, overpriced items. Who would buy bike stuff from there?0
