The Bitcoin threads could be interesting in the future

Status
Not open for further replies.

Firefly

Registered User
Messages
3,431
You can state that and I wouldn't jump down your throat.
You're quite the dramatist really!

It's completely moronic what you're going on with here.
Asking you to answer a question that you said you have answered, but haven't? Pot / kettle again

Are you seriously suggesting that ALL regulations can be assumed to be good!?
Where have I suggested that?

No wonder your gaggle of bitcoin naysayers don't get bitcoin!
I am not a bitcoin naysayer. I have said it before, I think it's GREAT for criminals

Ah, I see. I have to consent to this nonsense in your wayward opinion?
I never said you had to consent to anything. Why are you trolling a thread so close to your heart?

I won't be answering any of your questions going forward. :cool:
But you never did anyway ;)
 

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
@tecate has sunk to the lowest form discourse by attacking the person when they no longer have the capacity to engage in conversation. It is truly laughable that they do not see how they are twisting the words to try and save whatever face they have left. I actually used to think you had a solid understanding of Bitcoin, but I think your knowledge stretches only as far as whatever article you can find on google. I really think you lack the ability to rationalize Bitcoin as a technology.

Honestly, you've wasted so much time on here, as through however many posts in response to me over the last few days, the best you can come up with is 'regulation is good and bad', a complete nonsense. The point I added to this conversation is that regulation is needed for the bitcoin trading market to stop arbitrage, support stability and limit fraud. When faced with that you come up with 'regulation is good and bad'....I think you could give our politicians some advice!

Anyway, I don't engage with people who are unable to handle criticism of a topic, so by all means feel free to respond, but I will not be engaging with you on this topic any longer.
 

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
You're quite the dramatist really!
A great addition to the discussion. Thanks for your service.

Asking you to answer a question that you said you have answered, but haven't? Pot / kettle again
Aside from the inconvenient truth - question has long since been answered.

Where have I suggested that?
It's implicit.

I am not a bitcoin naysayer. I have said it before, I think it's GREAT for criminals
Anything that you can tar and feather it with - understood.

never said you had to consent to anything.
Then why the inappropriate comment.

But you never did anyway ;)
That's a blatant lie.
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
1,084
I have said it before, I think it's GREAT for criminals

I have heard this before, I have never been convinced of it. Bitcoin does not compare to cash when it comes to criminal enterprise. For sure there may be some use cases, but cash is king in the criminal world. As has often been pointed out here, bitcoins use as a MoE is not great.
 

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
@tecate has sunk to the lowest form discourse by attacking the person when they no longer have the capacity to engage in conversation.
That's where the rest of you take this - time and time again. I called it from the get go - you were determined to find conflict - that was your only interest here.

It is truly laughable that they do not see how they are twisting the words to try and save whatever face they have left. I actually used to think you had a solid understanding of Bitcoin, but I think your knowledge stretches only as far as whatever article you can find on google. I really think you lack the ability to rationalize Bitcoin as a technology.
I know. I really struggle to reach your level of intellect. :rolleyes:

Honestly, you've wasted so much time on here, as through however many posts in response to me over the last few days,
You don't like my responses - yeah, I've heard that a few times. Just coincidence that it comes from bitcoin naysayers.

When faced with that you come up with 'regulation is good and bad'....
The implicit suggestion is that regulation is good regardless of what specific regulations we're talking about. That is completely and utterly moronic.

Anyway, I don't engage with people who are unable to handle criticism of a topic,
I don't tend to mesh well with the arrogant - that's a certainty.

so by all means feel free to respond
Gee, thanks.

but I will not be engaging with you on this topic any longer.
Very best of luck to you.
 

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
I have heard this before, I have never been convinced of it. Bitcoin does not compare to cash when it comes to criminal enterprise. For sure there may be some use cases, but cash is king in the criminal world. As has often been pointed out here, bitcoins use as a MoE is not great.

BTC does not offer as much privacy as cash. So the question to ask is why is a decentralized currency that operates outside of the financial system is not the preferred currency of criminals?


(Tecate....this point is directed at WolfeTone and not you)
 

WolfeTone

Registered User
Messages
1,084
So the question to ask is why is a decentralized currency that operates outside of the financial system is not the preferred currency of criminals?

Well my theory on that is this - the primary driver for getting involved in criminality is at one end of the scale to get out of poverty, or at the other end of the scale indulge in the trappings of vast wealth.
At either end of the scale, cash is king for use as a medium of exchange and as you mention, privacy. Bitcoin falls well short as a MoE, so it makes little to zero sense to use it for criminal endeavours.
 

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
Well my theory on that is this - the primary driver for getting involved in criminality is at one end of the scale to get out of poverty, or at the other end of the scale indulge in the trappings of vast wealth.
At either end of the scale, cash is king for use as a medium of exchange and as you mention, privacy. Bitcoin falls well short as a MoE, so it makes little to zero sense to use it for criminal endeavours.

Yes that makes sense, although BTC is still used for some criminality (Dark Web, Silk Road) etc. However, given the reach of Cash vs BTC plus the technical learning curve it makes sense that cash has remained king.
 

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
So you can't back up your claim, or admit you actually don't understand the technology that underpins all this.
Take your nonsense to someone else, Leo - I'm not buying the manure you're selling.
 
Last edited:

Leo

Moderator
Messages
14,382
Take your nonsense to someone else, Leo - I'm not buying the manure your selling.

So go on then, explain how someone can send bitcoin over a satellite service without the need for an internet connection? You're the one trying to sell nonsense, I just called out on it.
 

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
So go on then, explain how someone can send bitcoin over a satellite service without the need for an internet connection? You're the one trying to sell nonsense, I just called out on it.
Your question was answered - and beyond that, you no longer have question privileges. A child needs to be treated as such .
 

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
@Leo it is not worth your time any longer, there is a clear lack of understanding and when faced with that truth the poster would rather attack the person. Over the last few days this has been proven again and again, nobody is allowed to contribute an opinion that disagrees with the shallow understanding of a novel technology or they will suffer a personal attack and be chastised as a 'naysayer'.

This is the classic rhetoric of people that lack an ability to look at the bigger picture rather than simply technology as a solution. This entire topic reminds me of this classic article on Innovation by Jill Lepore.


I took some time to reflect on the responses over the last few days, and I am not sure why we are actually asking questions to Tecate, as there is a clear lack of understanding outside of Bitcoin to adequately further any discussion. THe most annoying part of this discourse is the fall back response of stating uncertainties as certainities...'ah the market is growing and this will solve all the issues', 'oh the technology is new it will take time'. Unfortunately, that is not really an effective argument.

p.s I expect to be hit with some sarky response.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Leo

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
It was repeatedly avoided, but never directly answered.
Leo, your social capital with me is sub-zero - so you can keep repeating the same thing over and over. I responded to your query - you're not happy with the answer - that now becomes your issue. Any questions that you're putting to me are likely to be ignored from here on in - due to the attitude you present with and the disingenuous approach you're taking here. The same goes for your fellow travelers.
@Leo it is not worth your time any longer, there is a clear lack of understanding and when faced with that truth the poster would rather attack the person.
The origin of personal attacks lie with yourself and your fellow bitcoin naysayers (and despite what you once claimed, that's precisely what you are).

Over the last few days this has been proven again and again, nobody is allowed to contribute an opinion that disagrees with the shallow understanding of a novel technology or they will suffer a personal attack and be chastised as a 'naysayer'.
The 'last few days' provides an excellent example of what's at play here. It was brought to your attention repeatedly that there was no conflict - but you were hell bent on finding it. And the point upon which you (and your co-travelers) found it is priceless.

I was repeatedly chastised for taking the approach that regulation is oftentimes good - but cannot be relied upon to always be so - that individual regulations need to be assessed on their merits - that it must be ensured that innovation is nurtured and not stymied.

That was my position and that remained (and remains) my view and position - when I was repeatedly told I hadn't answered. Apparently that's 'sitting on the fence'! The crystal clear take away is that I was being badgered to confirm that regulation can only be good when nobody with any credibility could ever make such a statement.

I have never once suggested that I am any form of oracle on this subject over the course of over three years of discussion. However, you have on two occasions. And yet this is the guy who's implicit in suggesting that regulation can only be good and it can't harm the development of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. I have NO tolerance for arrogance regardless of how well versed someone is in a subject - that's not an excuse. For a guy who claims oracle status, how then has it escaped your attention that a long, long list of very well regarded people in the industry have flagged exactly what I referred to with regard to crypto and regulation? Given what you claim, you should be embarrassed.

Whilst we're on the subject, your insult in terms of the allegation that my input involves cursory google searches has zero credibility. I know the strength and depth of the time and energy I've put into this subject area. Had I listened to the 'advice' or views that were emanating from your co-travelers - or more recently yourself I'd be down life changing amounts of $ in the case of every single one of the past three years.

The reality is that this sub-forum has been partisan and frustrated with attempts to drown me out, you go with this contrivance (that I haven't answered questions when I have - yet you don't apply your own standards to yourselves). You and your merry band can agree amongst yourselves - don't think for a second I care - because I don't. Given your behaviour, you don't have and will never have my respect. What I do care about is that people who come here to gain an understanding of the subject have access to both sides of the debate. Exactly that. I don't care what conclusions they reach - so long as they have the info to make their own decision.

Now, I think it's crystal clear to everyone. I won't be brow beaten. You can continue on with this - your'e not bothering me one bit. But you are disrupting the ability of others to form their own opinion.

That's my position - just so that we're clear.
 
Last edited:

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
@tecate do you honestly believe that you are a victim? Every opinion I have produced on this subject has been met with the starkest criticism from yourself. You are so narrow-minded that if you actually took the time to reread the stance you are exhibiting on Regulation is no different to mine, you just jumped to a conclusion that my regulation comment was negative. Please clarify

I think I have mentioned that I have personally been invested in cryptos for a decade and worked on professional projects, so if you want to go down a d*** measuring about life-changing sums of money that is your prerogative.

However, the utility of BTC and the cryptocurrency market as an investment vehicle is an entirely different subject to the utility of BTC. Much like I can buy a share in Manchester United on the stock market, but it doesn't mean I have to support them.
 
Last edited:

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
@tecate do you honestly believe that you are a victim?
You give yourself far more credit than reality permits you - I'm no-one's 'victim'. That said, my post and the points raised stand.

Every opinion I have produced on this subject has been met with the starkest criticism from yourself.
Incorrect. Every opinion has been met with my own opinion. Last time I checked, we're all entitled to one.

You are so narrow-minded
Don't pretend for a second that you know the first thing about me - let alone contrive conclusions to fit your world view.

if you actually took the time to reread the stance you are exhibiting on Regulation is no different to mine, you just jumped to a conclusion that my regulation comment was negative. Please clarify
It's you that needs to re-read. On several occasions I pointed out that there was no such conflict in play - but you persisted with it. I was astonished at the new depths of stupidity evidenced up to yesterday. You had every opportunity to correct that but you did no such thing. Now when its underscored you have no choice. I'll repeat again - only a moron would suggest that blanket regulation (irrespective of the detail) could be good for the development of crypto and blockchain. Youcan wriggle this way or that but it's implicit in what you were driving at and what you were badgering me with. You did nothing to correct that - nor did you do so when @Firefly came to your support with precisely that.

I think I have mentioned that I have personally been invested in cryptos for a decade and worked on professional projects, so if you want to go down a d*** measuring about life-changing sums of money that is your prerogative.
Ah, I see. Now you're claiming I started with the d*** measuring. I did no such thing. Over the course of three years, find me a post of mine that lords it over someone on the basis of my knowledge of the subject? You were the one that started with that - you're basically suggesting that simply on the back of that, my opinion doesn't count.
As I outlined, I can't abide arrogance. I'm sure you have your own base of knowledge - but anyone who presents with arrogance - I'd sooner take the longer road and figure things out from normal people.

However, the utility of BTC and the cryptocurrency market as an investment vehicle is an entirely different subject to the utility of BTC.
Clearly, there's a direct connection between the two in one form or another.
 

DublinHead54

Registered User
Messages
847
It's you that needs to re-read. On several occasions I pointed out that there was no such conflict in play - but you persisted with it. I was astonished at the new depths of stupidity evidenced up to yesterday. You had every opportunity to correct that but you did no such thing. Now when its underscored you have no choice. I'll repeat again - only a moron would suggest that blanket regulation (irrespective of the detail) could be good for the development of crypto and blockchain. Youcan wriggle this way or that but it's implicit in what you were driving at and what you were badgering me with. You did nothing to correct that - nor did you do so when @Firefly came to your support with precisely that.

Tecate please be so kind as to point out where I have ever said that I am a proponent of blanket regulation? I have included my very first comment on the topic below. My comments were always on the back of a specific topic, I will clarify that when I said Bitcoin in the below I was referring to Bitcoin trading ecosystem, which should have been clear in subsequent posts. You clearly do not have a deep understanding of Financial Market regulation and how it protects participants and are leaning towards any regulation of the crypto market is to stymie innovation, which is frankly wrong.

This is true and the solution for longer-established markets to stop manipulation is through additional centralized control implemented via regulation. As bitcoin is unregulated and the barrier to entry for establishing an exchange is much lower, manipulation is rife or even just stability of the market is lesser. There was the whole Bitfinex saga of (creating USDT and dubious accounting to manipulate the price), and also more recently the algos reacitng to an April Fools joke causing a spike.

So if Bitcoin is to remain unregulated it will need to find other means to stop manipulation.



Ah, I see. Now you're claiming I started with the d*** measuring. I did no such thing.

See below for the cavalier boasting of the life-changing sums of money you have made in your most recent post.

I know the strength and depth of the time and energy I've put into this subject area. Had I listened to the 'advice' or views that were emanating from your co-travelers - or more recently yourself I'd be down life changing amounts of $ in the case of every single one of the past three years.

Clearly, there's a direct connection between the two in one form or another.

If this is true, and I am an investor, then how can you accuse me of being a naysayer?
 

tecate

Registered User
Messages
1,955
Tecate please be so kind as to point out where I have ever said that I am a proponent of blanket regulation? I have included my very first comment on the topic below. My comments were always on the back of a specific topic, I will clarify that when I said Bitcoin in the below I was referring to Bitcoin trading ecosystem, which should have been clear in subsequent posts.
As regards requests from here on out - go fish. That kindness has been expended given what you and your co-travelers are about here.
However, I will say this. It's implicit when taken in the context of the discussion as a whole as it pertained to regulation over the past two days.
What puts that further beyond doubt is your support of the other two carnival workers - who pitched in on your behalf. If you agreed with me, why didn't you post "i agree"? If that was too much for you to stomach, why didn't you correct them? You can try to wriggle out of this as much as you want - it's patently obvious.

You clearly do not have a deep understanding of Financial Market regulation and how it protects participants and are leaning towards any regulation of the crypto market is to stymie innovation, which is frankly wrong.
What would be helpful to your assertion here is if that's what I actually stated - it's not. I said that regulation for the most part can and oftentimes is - good. I added that that's not always the case and that care has to be taken to ensure that regulation is sympathetic to the innovation on hand. Worldwide, there are plenty of examples of wayward regulation as it pertains to crypto/blockchain. Now, I NEVER claimed to be an expert on regulation but there's no need to be to figure those basics out.

See below for the cavalier boasting of the life-changing sums of money you have made in your most recent post.
Oh, no you don't! I brought that up in direct response to sustained declarations of your superior knowledge whilst ridiculing mine. It took me three years to get to that - and only when provoked by your arrogant outbursts. There are well over 1000 posts of mine here - all pertaining to this subject area. Find me a post where I lord it over other discussion participants on the basis of me claiming to have superior knowledge. You're here two minutes and there are a few such examples.

If this is true, and I am an investor, then how can you accuse me of being a naysayer?
You were invited a number of times to set out your rationale - and initially ignored that - then refused to do so. Between that and your behaviour, your interaction with some others here - and your commentary on the subject in general, it's clear enough. No further clarification is required - It's no longer of interest to me (ergo, there's no mystery in it any more).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top