I have been into Btc for a few years and I had heard about his book and how good it is. So I ordered it today from amazon even if it was available online for free. He always said he didn't care if it was pirated and I didn't even want to bother printing it. This guy is humble and very smart. I'm sure his book will reflect this
30:30 you are talking about Angola. The people there want bitcoin, because the government makes it impossible to send money out of the country, and importers are forced to pay in the local currency, not USD for imports...and Angola does not produce much fruit and veg etc, so it all has to be imported. Bitcoin would help them, but nobody wants the Angolan currency. You can go sell Bitcoin there for a massive profit, but then you need to live there or have expenses in their currency, because you will struggle to get money out of the country.
good interview... nice to see the MI opening more and more to bitcoin and not being as exclusively stuck on Gold. That being said, the title, "Saifedean Ammous on Bitcoin Hype" and the accompanying description is misleading and, somewhat negative. The interview was mostly about the great benefits that bitcoin as a distributed and immutable form of money could afford us.
Thomas you don't know what you're saying. Satoshi Nakamoto envisioned lightning scaling before the lightning whitepaper was ever released. And your treatment of the whitepaper as some sort of religious document means you've probably never actually read it yourself. It doesn't specify many aspects of Bitcoin, including how many tokens, and had other errors in it. Even the first impletmentation of Bitcoin had to be hard forked because the code actually created an infinite supply. I'm sorry to say that you've been had by the BCH proponents like Ver, Craig Wright, and Bitmain. You're repeating their talking points without understanding what you're saying. Here's Satoshi's own words about a layer two scaling option: An unrecorded open transaction can keep being replaced until nLockTime. It may contain payments by multiple parties. Each input owner signs their input. For a new version to be written, each must sign a higher sequence number (see IsNewerThan). By signing, an input owner says "I agree to put my money in, if everyone puts their money in and the outputs are this." There are other options in SignatureHash such as SIGHASH_SINGLE which means "I agree, as long as this one output (i.e. mine) is what I want, I don't care what you do with the other outputs.". If that's written with a high nSequenceNumber, the party can bow out of the negotiation except for that one stipulation, or sign SIGHASH_NONE and bow out completely. The parties could create a pre-agreed default option by creating a higher nSequenceNumber tx using OP_CHECKMULTISIG that requires a subset of parties to sign to complete the signature. The parties hold this tx in reserve and if need be, pass it around until it has enough signatures. One use of nLockTime is high frequency trades between a set of parties. They can keep updating a tx by unanimous agreement. The party giving money would be the first to sign the next version. If one party stops agreeing to changes, then the last state will be recorded at nLockTime. If desired, a default transaction can be prepared after each version so n-1 parties can push an unresponsive party out. Intermediate transactions do not need to be broadcast. Only the final outcome gets recorded by the network. Just before nLockTime, the parties and a few witness nodes broadcast the highest sequence tx they saw.
Perhaps it's safe to assume that BTC has come closer to notions in Austrian economics, but the (original) ideas can just as well be used for other schools of academic economics thought. Bitcoin is obviously used for further development to remain practical. The standard for sound digital money is probably never going to be 100% compatible with the Austrian economic ideas like it is in gold as money, however, how I regard it, the digital monetary standard is currently in the works with BTC.
Am I crazy. I always thought gold and silver were considered "hard money" because they are physical commodities. Is Saifedean conflating rarity with hard money?
"Physical commodities" include orange juice, iron ore, fish, beef, aluminium, coal, mineral sands, oil, wheat etc. Something being a physical commodity doesn't bestow the title of "hard money" on it. Gold is a hard money as it functions as a reasonably reliable store of value. Silver used to but its stock to flow ratio is such that its value is more susceptible to price swings due to the high dilution mining has on it. Gold is usually mined at around 2% of the existing stock per year. Bitcoin's supply is currently growing at around 4-5% per annum, and will halve in about 2 years. It keeps halving every 4 years. This is the phenomenon that gives Bitcoin its "hard money" status, and what Ammous was referring to in the video. Currently there are 1800 new Bitcoins every single day being created. In 10 years there will only be 225 per day. And unlike Gold, even if the price increases dramatically, there's no market mechanism to increase the daily mined supply of new Bitcoins. The inverse of this, the negative if you like, is that if the price crashes, the market can't DECREASE the supply of Bitcoins either.
Great comments, I wear a hoodie! On a speculative note: Gold is a chemical element that I think people will one day be able to build with growing ease, given developments in nano and quantum technology. Gold has no built-in security feature.
This is just...brilliant. And the 9x% doesn't give a shit. I tell my close friends about these things. I think they understand on some level. I just can not get them to act on that information. At all. They humour me, "I'll have to look into that, thanks for the advice". and then...nothing. They've seen my holdings 20x in value. I've talked about it the whole time. Nothing.
The more transactions are going on, the higher are the transaction fees, and the transactions fees goes to the miners, so in the future miners just got paid with the transaction fees, as we can expect an increase in transactions, therefor the fees will rise as well
Great interview. This guy is my best economist. I recommended his book to all my workmates in an email yesterday! The bitcoin Standard! Alternative to Central banking! Way to go! lets live int he future. Buy and hold Bitcoin! All my liquid assets are in Bitcoin for the last 6 months!
The notion of "subjective value" only works (philosophically speaking) in an axiom with "objective value." Subjective value tends towards solipsistism which is contrary to economic axioms. Personal value or individual value would be better terms.
Bitcoin Relies upon the internet for its existence and in the event that the internet were disabled then Bitcoin would die and so would all stored value that Bitcoins represented
Pk is an imbecile who has gotten nothing right and has nothing interesting to say, he’s just a propaganda mouthpiece. All he has accomplished is enlightening me that the Nobel prize in economics is a joke
I sincerely hope that Mises Institute will exercise due diligence as it pertains to crypto. This is a hotly contested space as it's unfolding right in front of us. Forking is built-in for a reason. Mr. Ammous does not appear to understand that at all. I heard his interview on the Tom Woods Show and was slightly appalled. We are going to see political divides down the same ago-old lines. The same deceptive tactics we're all accustomed to (i.e. derision, deception) will be employed. The wrong people will cozy up to your great name. This will all work out over time, but in the short term, I urge caution, maybe even a degree of neutrality! Mises Institute is too important to me to see it led down the captured path.
They're also religious they practice Gematria, sum the letters of the following words using their alphabetic order a=1 to z=26 Money 13+15+14+5=25 = 72 BitCoin 2+9+20+3+15+9+14 = 72 World 23+15+18+12+4 = 72 Number = 73 Count = 73 Ordinal = 73 Wallet = 73 Sum the numbers on a dice 1+2+3+4+5+6= 21 Sum the letters of the word "Dice" 4+9+3+5 = 21 Its not a coincidence, they do everything by the numbers, And they're pushing their one world digital currency hard !
Thanks, what an amazing unsupported and irrelevant accusation from an anonymous poster. The code is open source so it could be created by anyone and it’s voluntary whether you choose to use it, so pick whatever evil creator you want to make up, it makes no difference.
Bitcoin is a SYSTEM, Peer-to-Peer Digital Cash ... Bitcoin is BITCOIN CASH Bitcoin BTC (aka Bitcoin Core BTC) is not the original Bitcoin any more because it no longer works as such... Bitcoin Cash BCH does.
It is also incorrect to say that Bitcoin is scaling on 2nd layer solutions, Bitcoin scales only on-chain, anything that is off-chain is not a Bitcoin system or Bitcoin transactions. It's misleading to claim that off-chain solutions are scaling of Bitcoin, it is in fact a complete lie, and also using off-chain solutions destroys all benefits of Bitcoin system in that you no longer have limited supply of money/coins as you can keep adding new coins into this off-chain solution (called Lightning network) and you also lose the Peer-to-Peer Payment system that Bitcoin provides, off-chain solutions do not provide this. Anyone that is not aware of this please visit my channel to learn about it.
It is also such lame thing for this guy to say that security for transaction is overkill. This security is not just for 1 transaction or 10 or even 1000... it is for ALL of the transactions that existed on the blockchain, and if you think about it, having whole globe using this system security should be that good... that is one of the BENEFITS of Bitcoin system, not a downside. Decentralisation has a cost for sure, but this cost of worth it.
Guy is completely wrong, BTC can‘t be used for anything due to restricted blocksize -> high fees. The original vision of bitcoin lived on in bitcoin cash (BCH), bitcoin BTC at this point is a failed science project about to collapse to zero!
Saifedean Ammous is only about Bitcoin, and none of the other cryptos. He says that Bitcoin won't be used to buy coffee, which may be true now that the miners have decided to go a different direction with it. However, Bitcoin's whitepaper shows it was originally meant to be a means of exchange. In another interview Saifedean says Litecoin is a joke and all other coins are shitcoins, but he doesn't realize that it will be the other coins that will end up being the means of exchange like Satoshi intended. Even if each crypto isn't able to facilitate as many transactions as Visa, with the combination of using several of them we could use them as a means of exchange for years, giving us time to fade out Visa while the tech advances to facilitate more transactions until Visa is obsolete.
Tucker has figured it out. I really wish Jeff Deist would interview Roger Ver. The guy poured his money into Bitcoin after reading Mises' Socialism, and seed funded most of the big projects today.
Anything BTC can do BCH can do better, and with bigger blocks. Even if you were right how do things stand today? Bch can handle roughly 16 times as many tx as btc.
There is no lightning network on Bcash , thus BTC has much more capacity and lower fees than BCH. My fees on Lightning for buying items are free to a single satoshi.
Ok and what % of your transactions of $100 are successful? and how many merchants accept lightning transactions? BCH has single satoshi tx and 0 satoshi TX. You cannot buy anything with ln. Ln is so far from being ready.
24:00 Wut!? Ever hear of lightning network? This guy is out of the loop big time. I have no problem with an objective analysis, but crypto is VERY fast moving and you MUST keep up to date if you wish for your arguments to remain valid.
Lightning Network is a joke. Here, nine months after this post about how great Lightning Network is, name one major company or retailer using Lightning Network as a payment channel? The laughable part is that L.N. was aimed at small transactions that can be grouped to a merchant and for combining lots of small, off-chain transactions (like a gift card). It is so complicated and will never be used by people making small transactions. And people won't need it for large ones (they'll just pay it with a regular transaction). L.N. is a brain fart.
It's impossible to make more bitcoin than The bitcoin network allows. You can found your own bitcoin, that will be worthless, because it doesn't have the network securing the scarcity.
Working for a public university isn't 'productive' ..... this guy isn't a Bitcoin, Austrian, or blockchain guru. He doesn't understand that it's the network of the blockchains that provide utility. One could put 21 million decorated toothpicks into supply and cap it at that, that doesn't make those toothpicks money because they are capped at 21 mil.
Bitcoin will probably scale just fine on chain. Not the BTC fork though, which has been corrupted by bankers. Bitcoin Cash (BCH) follows the design of Satoshi Nakamoto and has extremely low fees and scales just fine so far. There was a stress test a month ago where 20m on-chain transactions were made in a day and the fees stayed very low. The reason this will probably work for quite a while or indefinitely is computer hardware scaling (Moore's Law).
A BC is like a poker chip. Its only value is in its dollar exchange rate. It has no value on its own. Dollars have value because the govt forces it to have value. You have to have dollars to pay taxes and buy oil.
If the gov't forces dollars to have value, then they failed miserably when I was a young man. The US$ is subject to inflation, as any one who lived through the 60s, and 70s knows.
what a strange justification of the dollar. gov't forces us to use it so it has value. Bitcoin Cash is peer to peer we choose it so it cannot have value. yeah right.
That’s patently false. Bitcoin is used all over the globe, not just USA. You may be interested to know that all currencies that hyper inflate have governments with guns. Moreover, your USA government can’t “force” the dollar to have value. That would be price fixing. And some states are ALREADY accepting tax payments in crypto currency. Your argument is like saying “real estate doesn’t have value because you can’t pay your tax in real estate”. It’s obviously untrue. Bitcoin is a 9 year old technology and is already the 50th most valuable currency by global standards if you were to measure it against the world’s currencies. Step outside your USA bubble for just a moment and have a look at how it’s already being used around the world.
Michael P. Shipley: "Dollars have value because the govt forces it to have value." True statement. It's the current value, not a changing value over time.
