"If crypto is not the answer to our money problems, what is?" Good FT article

[tecate]

Disagree entirely with the premise of your argument.

 

[DublinHead54]

I'll just leave this here.

I don't get the point?

Every system will have bad actors that will exploit it, crypto or bitcoin is no different. The difference here is that the financial systems is hundreds if not thousands of multiples bigger than the crypto market, and the same applies for users. So of course the absolute size of issues are going to look big in comparison to a much smaller market.


Further point....the AML rules referenced by MAS in the article are the same rules that Crypto exchanges should adhere to.

 

[tecate]

I don't get the point?

Every system will have bad actors that will exploit it, crypto or bitcoin is no different.

This is precisely the point. Bitcoin detractors are going on with "but money laundering", etc. Money laundering, fraud, etc. were pervasive long before bitcoin came around.

 

[DublinHead54]

This is precisely the point. Bitcoin detractors are going on with "but money laundering", etc. Money laundering, fraud, etc. were pervasive long before bitcoin came around.

Yes Bitcoin / Crypto has an issue with Money Laundering, it isn't protected from it because it operates on a blockchain.

 

[time to plan]

Banking is not money laundering proof of course, but there are clear regulatory and legal structures to detect and punish (and therefore deter) wrongdoing, which would also include tax evasion as an example.

One of the features that is promoted for Crypto in general and Bitcoin as the leading example, is that it is 'resistant to censorship'. This is true. The flip side of this is that censorship is just one of the types of state control to which it is resistant. Overall, it's a value judgment as to whether you think that the benefits of resistance to censorship outweigh the disadvantages of resistance to state controls relating to wrongdoing and tax evasion. But to refuse to acknowledge that Crypto and Bitcoin are particularly useful to money launderers vs 'traditional banking' is somewhat obtuse.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

But who should go to jail, Bitcoin the Father with a big "B" or bitcoin the son with a small "b"?*
All this talk of criminals using bitcoin (B or b) only gives it credibility and fuels FOMO.

* Confused about the duality of B/b? Refer Fidelity.

 

[tecate]

Yes Bitcoin / Crypto has an issue with Money Laundering, it isn't protected from it because it operates on a blockchain.

Bitcoin doesn't have any more of an issue with money laundering than fiat to deserve the lazy critique it gets, to big it up in the way that folks who are just looking for something (anything!) to put bitcoin down. Why is it not "protected" from it because it "operates on a blockchain?" Cash doesn't have any control whatsoever in this respect. Fiat pretends to - but as per a UN report a couple of years back, their finding was that this AML/KYC nonsense has done next to nothing to combat money laundering...serving instead to act as a control on ordinary people, causing friction and getting in the way of people transacting and costing an arm and a leg (all of which has to be passed on to the ordinary Joe somewhere along the line).

Bitcoin is on a public blockchain. Law enforcement is having a field day with that.

 

[time to plan]

Bitcoin doesn't have any more of an issue with money laundering than fiat to deserve the lazy critique it gets, to big it up in the way that folks who are just looking for something (anything!) to put bitcoin down. Why is it not "protected" from it because it "operates on a blockchain?" Cash doesn't have any control whatsoever in this respect. Fiat pretends to - but as per a UN report a couple of years back, their finding was that this AML/KYC nonsense has done next to nothing to combat money laundering...serving instead to act as a control on ordinary people, causing friction and getting in the way of people transacting and costing an arm and a leg (all of which has to be passed on to the ordinary Joe somewhere along the line).

Bitcoin is on a public blockchain. Law enforcement is having a field day with that.

We were comparing Bitcoin with traditional banking. If I try to put 500k in cash into a bank account, they will ask me for proof of funds. Is there a broadly equivalent process with Bitcoin? As I said, it's the flip side of being resistant to censorship.

 

[tecate]

If two ordinary Joe's transfer funds between them on the bitcoin network, they're free to do so without impediment. If either of those ordinary Joe's then touches centralized financial services (crypto exchanges and banks) with those funds they may be required to provide proof of funds, etc. depending upon whatever regulation is in place within that jurisdiction. In that respect, it's similar to cash, although it leaves a completely transparent blockchain trail - unlike cash.

 

[DublinHead54]

The point Tecate makes in theory is right but in practice is not the reality and it is certainly narrowing as crypto is regulated.

The vast majority of people who entered bitcoin in the last few years have done so through centralised exchanges who shock horror have to use the same AML controls as the regular Fiat system.

 

[tecate]

The point Tecate makes in theory is right but in practice is not the reality and it is certainly narrowing as crypto is regulated.

The primary global crypto exchanges have been implementing AML controls for some time. Of course there have been exceptions, the depth of those systems has varied and there has been variance depending upon where you are in the world.

The vast majority of people who entered bitcoin in the last few years have done so through centralised exchanges who shock horror have to use the same AML controls as the regular Fiat system.

There's no shock horror in the conventional system doing what it ordinarily does. The transactional movement of cash between individuals and retail businesses is somewhat similar (although Bitcoin allows law enforcement to trace transactions on a public blockchain).
If centralized finance has total network effect and is the ocean where wealth is concerned and bitcoin remains a drop in comparison with that ocean, it stands to reason that entrants have utilized centralized exchanges in order to access it.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

One of the characteristics of a cult is that words mean different things to them. "inflation" is a good example.

“In the bitcoin world, they don't use the term ‘inflation’ quite the way that economists do, as a general increase in consumer price. Instead, they tend to use it to mean an increase in the money supply,” said economist and CoinDesk columnist Frances Coppola.

Of course this is very useful for proselytizers like Fidelity.

One of the greatest characteristics of bitcoin’s properties is its scarcity. Not only is bitcoin scarce (bitcoin’s current inflation rate of about 1.8%...

Note that Coindesk refers to the "bitcoin world". Can I be forgiven for calling that world a "cult"? And it is not just misguided economists who think inflation is about consumer prices. For the record the inflation in prices in bitcoin terms has been over 60% p.a. over the last two years.

 

[tecate]

One of the characteristics of a cult is that words mean different things to them. "inflation" is a good example.

I'm sorry if there are cryptocurrencies in existence that are both inflationary and disinflationary through their token supply. I'm sorry that it upsets you that people have calculated the rate of inflation of bitcoin based on its current token issuance.

For anyone who does want to understand the distinction between consumer price inflation and inflationary/deflationary cryptocurrencies, here's this CNBC article.

Of course this is very useful for proselytizers like Fidelity

Yes, it's a total conspiracy Duke - for Fidelity to talk about token supply inflation/deflation as outlined in that CNBC article above. How very dare they!

Note that CoinDesk refers to the "Bitcoin World"

CoinDesk didn't refer to any such thing. The infinite pizza lady did.

Can I be forgiven for calling that World a "cult"?

Certainly not, Duke. But its the internet so any coward can reveal themselves to be as they are from the safety and security of their front room, bearing in mind you have pigeon-holed anyone who has ever said anything that might be remotely positive about bitcoin as a "cultist". As you conceded years ago already you can't be objective on the subject. This type of commentary just reveals the extent of your lack of objectivity.

And it is not just misguided economists who think inflation is about consumer prices.

As you well know, nobody has denied the use of the word inflation relative to consumer prices.

You'll be familiar with the term 'market volatility' Duke. Were options traders equally wrong to coin the term 'implied volatility'? Do you get equally animated and enraged by this? Of course not.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

You'll be familiar with the term 'market volatility' Duke. Were options traders equally wrong to coin the term 'implied volatility'? Do you get equally animated and enraged by this? Of course not.

Careful. That's my specialist sport. Implied volatility is the backward fit of the Black Scholes formula to option prices. It refers to the exact same thing - the standard deviation of the change over time of the natural logarithm of the prices of the underlying.
BTW I have a bet with PP that you will have the last word. After all you did on 7 out of the last 9 crypto threads in this forum. I do hope the referee doesn't stop play.

 

[tecate]

Careful. That's my specialist sport. Implied volatility is the backward fit of the Black Scholes formula to option prices. It refers to the exact same thing - the standard deviation of the change over time of the natural logarithm of the prices of the underlying.

I'm going to stick rigidly to your logic here and I'm now calling options traders cultists. How very dare they come up with this implied volatility term - what a load of crap.

Market Volatility vs. Implied Volatility

BTW I have bet with PP that you will have the last word. After all you did on 7 out of the last 9 crypto threads in this forum. I do hope the referee doesn't stop play.

There's a referee?

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

For anyone who does want to understand the distinction between consumer price inflation and inflationary/deflationary cryptocurrencies, here's this CNBC article.

Some cryptocurrencies have an unlimited supply of tokens, making them inflationary while others have fixed number of tokens in circulation, making them deflationary.

Inflation refers to an increase in the price of goods and services. This happens when too much currency is in circulation, causing money to lose its value. On the other hand, deflation refers to an increase in the value of a currency and a corresponding dip in the price of goods and services. Deflation is usually caused by a decrease in the supply of the currency

Mr Last Word, do you ever, ever, ever admit that you are completely wrong?

 

[tecate]

Mr Last Word, do you ever, ever, ever admit that you are completely wrong?

lol. You haven't written anything above. You've quoted some tracts of text from the CNBC article - the one that provides the distinction between cryptocurrency supply inflation/deflation and consumer price inflation.

As regards admitting when I'm wrong - the most important thing to remember is this ->

For six years, I've said that I accept that bitcoin can fail or it can continue to succeed and expand network effect.
For six years, you have maintained an absolutist view, stating that there can only be ONE outcome relative to something that you have zero personal control over, not being open to the possibility of ever being wrong. How would you ever be able to admit you're wrong if you can't even be open to the possibility???

As for me, I've been wrong about lots of things. I'll continue to be wrong. I'll continue to change my views - because it's all part of the process of learning, understanding ,etc. However, if I asked you to point to something I've been "wrong" about here, I've little doubt but that you'll rhyme off a list of things that either aren't wrong or have yet to be proven to be wrong.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

lol. You haven't written anything above. You've quoted some tracts of text from the CNBC article - the one that provides the distinction between cryptocurrency supply inflation/deflation and consumer price inflation.

I am going to be very generous here and assume that you have completely misunderstood the CNBC article. The article explains what inflation means - in consumer price terms as all of us outside the Bitcoin World understand it.
It then states that changes in the supply of a currency can be inflationary or deflationary. No argument with that at all, it was a main raison d'etre for bitcoin. It is testament to the fact that bitcoin has not become a currency that its rate of increase of supply bears no relation to its consumer price inflation. But in Bitcoin World everyone is happy out with their definition of inflation.

 

[tecate]

It is testament to the fact that bitcoin has not become a currency that its rate of increase of supply bears no relation to its consumer price inflation. But in Bitcoin World everyone is happy out with their definition of inflation.

You can discuss its volatility all day long as I've seen you do under the guise of referencing consumer price inflation while indulging your bias for short time preference (rather than do that calculation over the 13+ years of Bitcoin's existence). Fill your boots.

However, the issue is that you brought that in - way back when this conflation of two separate items came up - when the reference (I think it was by Caitlin Long at the time) was strictly in relation to bitcoin's token supply inflation. Nothing else.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

You can discuss its volatility all day long as I've seen you do under the guise of referencing consumer price inflation while indulging your bias for short time preference (rather than do that calculation over the 13+ years of Bitcoin's existence). Fill your boots.

Over 13 years in gentile speak there has been unprecedented btc deflation - 2 pizza worth $41 cost then btc10k. btc10k is now worth $268,720,407. But in Bitcoin World there has been massive inflation, supply up from 2.15m to 19.45m.

However, the issue is that you brought that in - way back when this conflation of two separate items came up - when the reference (I think it was by Caitlin Long at the time) was strictly in relation to bitcoin's token supply inflation. Nothing else.

Long memory, Mr Last Word. It was the recent reference by Fidelity that triggered my current posts. Fidelity holds our hands through the mystery of bitcoin duality but then talks about inflation without spelling out that it means that term as it is understood in Bitcoin World.

This is not me being pedantic over the meaning of a word. I am highlighting the cynicism of the cult trying to move the goalposts.