Merged Bitcoin - Part 3

psionl0 said:
So somebody on the internet confirms your bias? Good for you.

BTW If that person on the internet claims that "real Bitcoin transactions are cumbersome, slow and expensive" then you can be sure that they know about as much about bitcoin as they do about the temperature of their backside.
Click to expand...
Let me get this straight according to you:

The European Central Bank is just "someone on the internet"

The ECB Director of Market Systems and Payments is qualified to call Bitcoin transactions slow and cumbersome.

It seems to me that these are some actual experts on the subject while you and, well you. I'm pretty sure most people understand who's opinions are more valuable.
 
Last edited:
lomiller said:
Appeal to legitimate authority is a perfectly valid argument form, and the ECB certainly is a legitimate authority in this case.
Click to expand...
That is just an opinion piece and is not immune to scrutiny just because the ECB is a "legitimate" authority.

Most of the so called "experts" in finance haven't dealt with bitcoin before and, like the idiots in this forum, believe that bitcoin came into existence yesterday and will be gone tomorrow.

Anybody who knows anything at all about bitcoin knows that the only cost of a transaction is the fee that must be offered to get the transaction on the blockchain and that you can get 6 confirmations (the irreversible standard) in as little as 30 minutes. Calling that "cumbersome, slow and expensive" reeks of ignorance.
 
psionl0 said:
It is unbelievable how many people new to this thread think that mentioning "tulips" is somehow clever.

They are basically saying that there was a failed investment 400 years ago therefore bitcoin is bad. :crazy:
Click to expand...

No to all points. I'm not new to this thread, I'm not mentioning tulips to sound clever, and your "basically saying" is completely ignoring the explanations you've been given which demonstrate the parallels over and over.
 
psionl0 said:
That is just an opinion piece and is not immune to scrutiny just because the ECB is a "legitimate" authority.

Most of the so called "experts" in finance haven't dealt with bitcoin before and, like the idiots in this forum, believe that bitcoin came into existence yesterday and will be gone tomorrow.

Anybody who knows anything at all about bitcoin knows that the only cost of a transaction is the fee that must be offered to get the transaction on the blockchain and that you can get 6 confirmations (the irreversible standard) in as little as 30 minutes. Calling that "cumbersome, slow and expensive" reeks of ignorance.
Click to expand...

IOW you think that you are the real expert in monetary systems, The European Central Bank is a bunch of uninformed idiots who don't know anything and the The ECB Director of Market Systems and Payments doesn't know the first thing about how bitcoins can be used to pay for things...

Your appeal to personal authority is staggering in it's stupidity.
 
lomiller said:
IOW you think that you are the real expert in monetary systems, The European Central Bank is a bunch of uninformed idiots who don't know anything and the The ECB Director of Market Systems and Payments doesn't know the first thing about how bitcoins can be used to pay for things...
Click to expand...
Your problem is that you don't know anything about bitcoin and that is why you are desperately clinging onto a bad review like this without daring to analyze the content.
 
lomiller said:
IOW you think that you are the real expert in monetary systems, The European Central Bank is a bunch of uninformed idiots who don't know anything and the The ECB Director of Market Systems and Payments doesn't know the first thing about how bitcoins can be used to pay for things...

Your appeal to personal authority is staggering in it's stupidity.
Click to expand...
No, he thinks that the 'experts' are just pushing an agenda that props up their self-appointed position of authority, and nobody is actually any more of a 'real' expert than anyone else. IOW, financial nihilism.

You see, the market will do what it wants and nobody has any control or predictive power over it (other than that Bitcoin will always become more valuable in the long term). Fiat currencies are just as worthless as Bitcoin, no matter how much banksters like the ECB insist otherwise. Bitcoin is just more honest about it.

psionl0 never set himself up as an expert, except to say that everyone is just as clueless as he is. So it's not appeal to personal authority, it's projection.
 
Brainster said:
What amused me was the interviewer basically begging the audience for a round of applause for this thief
Click to expand...
That's a bit harsh. Everybody who 'invests' in Bitcoin expecting the price to go up is a wannabe thief, because they all know their gain must come at someone else's loss. Personally I have no problem with thieves stealing from each other, so long as it doesn't affect the real world.

But course in practice it does spill out into the real world, and lots of innocents get hurt. That's why Bitcoin needs to be strongly regulated 'at the border' - preferably regulated out of existence.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
That's a bit harsh. Everybody who 'invests' in Bitcoin expecting the price to go up is a wannabe thief, because they all know their gain must come at someone else's loss.
Click to expand...

Harsh? These people stole billions, which they gambled away and now they can't repay it. This is only off by about a single order of magnitude of the scale of Bernie Madoff and Enron, and reasonably close to the Worldcom scandal.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
No, he thinks that the 'experts' are just pushing an agenda that props up their self-appointed position of authority, and nobody is actually any more of a 'real' expert than anyone else. IOW, financial nihilism.
Click to expand...
That is pretty much your position too.

The only reason why you linked to the article is that it was negative about bitcoin. Those "experts" who aren't sufficiently negative enough about bitcoin will never be quoted by you.
 
Brainster said:
Harsh? These people stole billions, which they gambled away and now they can't repay it. This is only off by about a single order of magnitude of the scale of Bernie Madoff and Enron, and reasonably close to the Worldcom scandal.
Click to expand...

I won’t be at all surprised when they have a solid defense of: this was all allowed by our user agreement.

Will it work? Don’t know.

When you play Willy Wonka’s game, you play by his rules.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
No, he thinks that the 'experts' are just pushing an agenda that props up their self-appointed position of authority, and nobody is actually any more of a 'real' expert than anyone else. IOW, financial nihilism.

You see, the market will do what it wants and nobody has any control or predictive power over it (other than that Bitcoin will always become more valuable in the long term). Fiat currencies are just as worthless as Bitcoin, no matter how much banksters like the ECB insist otherwise. Bitcoin is just more honest about it.

psionl0 never set himself up as an expert, except to say that everyone is just as clueless as he is. So it's not appeal to personal authority, it's projection.
Click to expand...

He constantly argues that everyone who disagrees with him simply doesn't know as much as he does. He'll never accept even the slightest possibility that he is wrong because he thinks anyone who disagrees with him is simply too stupid to understand what he said.
 
psionl0 said:
That is just a meaningless set of random words -
Click to expand...

No, that was a clear and concise debunking of your response. a_unique_person explained how the arguments of bitcoin proponents are like god of the gaps arguments. Now it's up to you to either draft a real counterargument or to withdraw your objection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom