Tone Vays vs Roger Ver debate on BTC vs BCH as 'hard currency'.
First part with Jimmy song, same subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2-RXTqWDek
Description of 'Hard money/ currency from https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/hardcurrency.asp
Hard Currency
What is 'Hard Currency'
A hard currency is a monetary system that is widely accepted around the world as a form of payment for goods and services. It usually comes from a country that has a strong economic and political situation. A hard currency is expected to remain relatively stable through a short period of time, and to be highly liquid in the forex or foreign exchange (FX) market.
BREAKING DOWN 'Hard Currency'
The most tradable currencies in the world are the U.S. dollar (USD), European euro (EUR), Japanese yen (JPY), British pound (GBP), Swiss franc (CHF), Canadian dollar (CAD), Australian/New Zealand dollar (AUD/NZD) and South African rand (ZAR). The U.S. dollar enjoys status as the world's foreign reserve currency, the reason it is used in 70% of international trade transactions.
All of these currencies garner the confidence of international investors and businesses because they are not prone to dramatic depreciation or appreciation. A depreciation in a nation's currency is the result of either an increase in the money supply or a loss of confidence in its future ability as a store of constant value, because of either economic, financial or governmental concerns. A striking example of an unstable or a soft currency is the Argentinian peso, which in 2015, lost 34.6% of its value against the dollar, making it highly unattractive to foreign investors.
The debate was ok but I was disappointed with this debate. Roger lost but I would of liked it to be more pro. At this point they are so invested in there respected fav coins that their emotions run high. Tony made good points and did win the debate but the tone if you can hear became more like an argument. I think most of us can agree-that Roger is trying to seek attention. And we make fun of him for it?But are we doing anything to prevent that? The more we respond to him the more relevance he has. When will we just learn to ignore him? Then again we know CSW is not Satoshi and almost of all of us just want to ignore him but what you know-he "relevant" again-FU Calvin/Coingeek. I just want the freaking drama to end. BCH is not Bitcoin-it an altcoin that pretty ok ignoring some of the people. BTC is bitcoin and it wants offchain scaling-just let it happen. It can work-just let the coins experiment. **The "which coin is better" will never stop-free market makes sure of it-but atleast end the scaling war feud. It over. Each side is not helping to end. Roger doesn't like BTC-fine don't list. Call Btc-bitcoin and BCH a better bitcoin-Bitcoin 2.0 or whatever. I love BTC and will never use BCH but I done with this dumb type of shit. I doubt one side will ever back down. I however feel the BCH side is doing more of the physical wounds that are not letting the wound scar.
#selfupvote to put this comment above...
same here @sames
@rogerkver, Store of value is a pre-requisite to allow for transfer of value ("cash").
link to time https://youtu.be/i2-RXTqWDek?t=1627
According to Roger Ver :
P2P electronic store of value = Bad
vs
P2P electronic cash system = Good.
But cash = value
Roger doesn't care, he's just pumping his latest con. He even said "I would switch < coins > in a minute and do something else."
He's a bored millionaire trying to fleece people as a game, and he's gotten a few hooray henries -- you see them chanting during the "debate". He's no better than George Soros, meddling just because he can. Any claims that Ver has about helping anyone is just virtue-signaling bullshit.
He's a egoist, self-centered con-man, grifter and idle rich kid with aspirations towards power.
Basically the worst components of corrupt politicians, wealthy brats and psycho executives.
No wonder BCash is floundering like it is, every single thing that tumbles out of Roger's mouth is a inept lie designed to paper over his flawed project.
Too funny.
Yes, that's correct. Utility in economic transactions "cash" is what drives the value over time. This why we nearly saw Ethereum flip the value on Bitcoin last summer. Heavy use = heavy demand.
Over time the most useful Cryptos will become the most valuable. Just the dollar was used to buy oil, goods and services. The larger the economics of scale the more value that is accrued. Good money drives out the bad. Unless Bitcoin makes significant upgrades better currencies will drive away slow expensive ones.
Even if lightening network was working 100% today, which is not. What happens if millions of people decide to all close their channels at one time? Segwit only has 40% adoption rate after one year and blocks are still at 1MB with only tps second. That's not going work.
@hedge-x Today we have Bitcoin debit cards. Hell, we even have debit cards for altcoins and icos that lead into a debit card. With this in play do you think we will see a mass adoption in our lifetime?
I know CC companies have blocked many the cards from working on the Visa network. My Shift card still works since I got in 2015. Is there any other Crypto debt cards I can use in US? I want one to spend Altcoins with.
Shift supports any coin that has coinbase support. We have one and it can be used with BTC, BCH, ETH, LTC and now ETC.
Yes, Bitpay (VISA) but they are like a bunch of 5th graders running a company. No altcoins ones that I know of in the US yet.
Do you know if Bitcoin Cash works on their debit card? I know they added BCH support for the payment processing. Yeah, it's a shame we all have to suffer like this. It really slows the Crypto adoption down for everyone. For a Crypto company that's been around so long they are incredibly slow to add.
I believe it does but I've yet to try it. I remember seeing a memo on my app about BCH being accepted.
*3 tps
That's not the point. The point is that you can't store value well if you risk fees skyrocketing or you suddenly must use a much more advanced system to use what's in your wallet.
You don't "store" value unless you retain your money as it was. What do you retain it for? Later use.
Btc fees have been around 5c to transact any amount for 9+ months.
How many wire transfers have you done this month?
Are wire transfers completely useless because they cost 50$?
If you take some steps back you'll realize there is more money in need for a solid store of value than looking for cheap credit card like payments
Do you mind losing 93% of your value (BCH:BTC) to be able to transact cheaper on a network who's main proponent admit transaction fees are barely an afterthought?
Why would anyone invest in a currency that doesn't have a plan for upkeeping security when the block reward phases out?
Be patient, don't fuck up humanity's opportunity to free itself from TPTB. Actual scaling technologies are tested and almost ready for mass adoption.
BCH had lost a year ago. Do you think it makes sense to expect people wait 10 more years to see if their currency will still be worth something? It's irresponsible and reckless.
BTC fees are better than they've been in a long time and still not competitive on their own. BTC is popular for other reasons, primarily network effect and the most PoW.
I've made zero wire transfers. Useless? Of course not, but not comparable to cash transfer. Hardly peer to peer etc.
I don't know who you're talking about, but it shouldn't matter. 93% is not a stable value, but then again when did we see stability in Bitcoin before that. This isn't my first time the merry go round. That's not to say it couldn't crash way down from here. You simply can't know these things.
No idea what you're talking about here... The market can set the fees at any level necessary. If higher fees are actually necessary the nodes will adjust, but they will always trend towards zero since supply is not artificially capped. That's all.
Be patient? I'm probably one of the more patient people you'll ever meet. If we meet in real time at some point. I thought there was no time pressure? Then how can we "fuck it up" by preferring something different in the market place?
Great. Will be interesting to see them. Not that it was ever impossible to scale or that I approve of the SegWit route and a bunch of other stuff. But I've been very supportive of more SegWit and adoption of various innovations. As long as I don't have to use them.
#Reckless? No one has to wait for anyone. Build and use whatever you want. This isn't a democracy. This is free markets.
I can't help but feel that this has more to do with ego than providing a solid basis for a balanced humanity.
#needsMoreHulkHogan
the screaming wasn't very inspiring...
Can't but agree with that. Roger has this habit of always being kind of in your face about whatever he thinks and that can be hard to look past. Especially since he isn't the best debater either.
But he does make valid points if you take the time to think about what he says and you can put some context around it. Problem is I guess, most people have not even read the Bitcoin design to begin with. Even fewer Satoshis clarifications as to how it scales.
Out of the more recent crowd to join in on the crypto boom, most have gotten used to speaking in a way that directly contradicts all terminology from the early days and can't leave any room for other perspectives. Coming around to what they deem "centralization" (market driven industry consolidation) and "trust" (reliance on PoW) is not gonna be easy.
Both made valid points but the yelling is just a turn off to the core messaging ...
Eventually there is space for both ( IMO) just store of value coins and transactional coins , it's not a zero sum game but for some reason they keep making it seem that way.
It's really not possible to "store value" if you don't have a high transaction quality. You are storing value for later use which will involve a transaction, not just to watch the "value" climb.
So if you want high quality on both fronts, you need the currency to be like a coin — a cash type transaction. Instantly and cheaply transferable directly from one person to the next, with the help of the P2P network to disincentive double spending.
Lightning network helps with some of this, but it can't be considered entirely on par with transacting directly P2P and settling each transaction directly on the Bitcoin network. These will always be two distinct classes of transactions with different security requirements and properties.
A lot of people consider themselves cheated by the developers and the rest of the community, that made the blocks get full on purpose and say the design Satoshi produced doesn't work. That in combination with being banned from places like r/Bitcoin and hit by waves of propaganda has turned people sour. It's not helping, but it's understandable.
Gold ?
No. How well established is gold as money in todays society and why is that?
We had a note based system for gold because it wasn't enough for people to only use it directly and eventually because direct use was banned.
If the cost of transfer is too high, you get that situation. Then you have to establish a different medium for the actual exchange, such as notes or a digital network to handle a custody based ownership transfer, without really transferring the now no longer used "coins". This immediately leads to routing and liquidity issues at best, regulatory capture at worst.
You don't buy gold or other commodities today because they store value well in this sense. The spread is too high and its cumbersome to get in and out. The state won't tolerate it if it should ever become a real contender to replacing ordinary transactions.
Most gold bugs hold it as a speculative commodity play, a hedge, or of course in case the world goes completely to hell in which case the downside of physical gold coins or even bars compared to paper notes/banks and the established law of todays society would be the least of your worries.
Subject was
Gold still has a $8 trillion market cap.
And did you store value in the sense described here? No. There are plenty of other commodities and stocks that work just as well for speculation.
That doesn't mean that you'll put all your money in them, does it? Think about why not. Why is that not practical.
I don't see any reason why you should give up one half of what makes sound money.
Gold has other built-in utility like making jewelry out of it. That's how it became a great store of value. Remember though gold was a currency and store of value before fiat came along. Remember just 150 years ago paper notes were issued backed 1:1 with gold. I was just easier to carry the notes around than the gold bars.
I have studied economics my whole life. I'll just tell you that a good money drives out the bad. A extremely low cost scalable user friendly Cryptos will kill off the slow and expensive ones.
Next year if Bitcoin Lightening Network does not perform the market share will be taken away from better more user, friendly and scalable Cryptos.
Makes sense..
You've made the Steemit Minute for today! Congrats!
Check out the Video Here: https://steemit.com/news/@reseller/tv18fvjg
Obviously not the better of debates. It got heated right off the bat from the actual debate with Jimmy previously, in which Jimmy had crowned himself moderator and had an entire speech pre-written out of the blue.
(edit: I just noticed now that Jimmy blocked me on Medium for criticizing his full speech that he posted afterwards)
But if you ignore the fact that one guy (Roger as usual) is significantly louder than the other and you listen to what is said some things will no doubt stick out if you've been around for this debate up until now.
Tone is not a Bitcoin design maximalist per se, he is a HODLer/noforks maximalist. Roger is a crazy ancap and ready to switch coins if one doesn't work out. The former doesn't think competitive scaling is a good idea. The latter still thinks Bitcoin can scale through industry consolidation and professionalism.
Whoever you agree with, that gives you a clue.
Holding you savings in bitcoin is what every Bitcoin maximalist does. . Noforks maximalist? What does that even mean?
Bitcoin is what Satoshi described via posts and whitepaper. This hasn't changed, but what most people know as Bitcoin certainly has.
Holding your savings in it doesn't make you a maximalist. That's as much a shortcut as saying anything different to what people know as Bitcoin is an altcoin. That's not what the concept did or should refer to.
Tone is against hard forks period and even more vocally against "contentious" forks, which is a strange concept considering there is always going to be some contention to any fork.
Bitcoin is not about popular opinion or "one node one vote" or anything like that. This is what he and so many others either don't get, or more likely just don't want to admit at this point.
I'll tell you right off, Your comment is uninfomed mental masturbation.
That means a lot coming from you.
This is such a dumb debate. It's fiat with a cap on the printing. It still can't scale, it's still volatile, it still has no intrinsic demand, it's expensive to transact, and its large server farms and pools can still be regulated by governments. Both have the same problems. One is controlled by Bilderberg, and one is controlled by people who lie about what blockchains do the most transactions for the benefit of their portfolios. The Bitcoin community needs to stop having these pointless debates and pay attention to the real innovation. That's where the real competition is.
Finally a comment in this whole thread worth commenting on.
I mean its ridiculous. This just shows the idiocy of the market. Artificially creating "competition" between x and y obsolete tech as to spark more interest and create more focus on 2 cryptocoins.
I mean, that is the cheapest and most transparent marketing strategy.
And it worked. @transisto and another user got into a somewhat heated discussion over it. People are commenting, etc.
Samsung vs iphone, mcdonalds vs burger king, coke vs pepsi, xbox vs playstation.
You create some drama, drama draws attention, 2 camps form, more drama insues and more attention is brought to the discussion. Both sides win.
Btc or bch? Neither has the potential to be a store of value nor a currency with wide adoption.
I might have posted some of this before you....but whatev.
Pure Brilliance!
Wow. Heated conversation with their respective opinions. This makes me feel like I am watching a concert
Crypto has the potential to make any country a developed country. It's important that govt should have a knowledge on crypto and it's potential