A direct and important discussion on the status of crypto

[James212]

Bitcoin is backed by the odds of the legacy financial system imploding.  None of that other stuff matters.  Since there's been no 1776 against the Federal Reserve so far, it's pretty damn obvious nobody is interested in switching unless the legacy system goes down.

 .....   
Because the majority do not understand the financial problem.  The crypto world is at risk of living in a bubble of its own thinking. 
Barring a financial system failure mass adoption will be long and difficult now that it has failed to capitalize of the initial popular wave in 2012/2013.   Commercial adoption (while maintaining the ethical objectives) seems to be the more practical way forward. 

[Helikopterben]

5)  Techno-speak needs to be kept far, far way from the promotion of blockchain technology products.   

Much like the switch of the telecoms from wire to Voice over IP, it is easier for market acceptance if crypto and all the associated complexities remain under the hood, unseen.

more like a car salesman talking about details of the latest engine tech: piston compression, cylinder arrangements, cam lobes ect, it  only confuses the customer that wants to hear about the smooth ride and great handling.  They can careless how it is accomplished.  Therefore market approach needs to be about how the product can improve the things in the “real world” that the customer is already doing.  They must be able to relate to your proposal and fit it into their current needs or current actions.   A firm link must be make between blockchain technology that solves real world issues (not ideological ones).  The blockchain industry needs to reach out and connect with the wider world not continue to recirculate business and ideas within it self.

6) The “killer app” (that most likely will incorporate the charictaritics above) is becoming over-due.   and is desperately needed.  Without it the adoption horizon will be exponentially longer and may miss the window for mass adoption. 

BitShares is 90% there.  I continue to be amazed that i can interface directly with a completely censorship resistant, sound money system and trade the BTC:USD pair while having full control of my money at all times (gox-proof)... and soon I should be able to trade USD/GOLD, USD/OIL, and many other traditional pairs.  This achievement has solved many financial problems that have plagued mankind for centuries.  That is your killer app.

The only missing link is liquidity to bootstrap internal markets.  In sound money systems such as bitshares, liquidity has to come naturally for the most part.  It cannot be faked as in legacy systems based on fiat currencies, where programs such as QE are used to create the illusion of liquidity while destroying the underlying foundation.  This natural liquidity is a feature, not a bug.  Some things can be done to assist in the creation of liquidity, but most liquidity will have to come naturally as traders and investors become comfortable with the system and decide to put more money in. 

The nubits guys have previously offered liquidity services for a fee, which may be a good option, even though we would be paying the competition for their services.  This may be something that can be considered for a worker proposal to attempt to bootstrap the internal markets with liquidity. 

[Ben Mason]

Bitcoin is backed by the odds of the legacy financial system imploding.  None of that other stuff matters.  Since there's been no 1776 against the Federal Reserve so far, it's pretty damn obvious nobody is interested in switching unless the legacy system goes down.

Despite the internet, people still read books. The legacy system does not need to collapse in order for bitcoin's protocol to find utility.  Companies like Cryptonomex will hopefully build many private blockchains that the legacy system can make use of.....perhaps survive a little longer.  However, there must always be a public version based on rules with the utmost attention to integrity.  That being the case, eventually, as more people demand trust and take an interest in how it's achieved, the potential of projects like BitShares can be realised.   

Also, when you talk about switching, what about the billions of unbanked people?  I'm pretty sure they would love something they have access to, that works and that they can afford.  The legacy system has had it's chance to cater for them.

[r0ach]

Bitcoin is backed by the odds of the legacy financial system imploding.  None of that other stuff matters.  Since there's been no 1776 against the Federal Reserve so far, it's pretty damn obvious nobody is interested in switching unless the legacy system goes down.

[Ben Mason]

Ive said it once and will say it here again...
The gaming demographic is where we will hit it big.  Everyone plays games at some point in time and gamers are a growing and Crypto-capablr userbase demographic.  No we do not need the current system to use us...economies ON THE INTERNET will grow and thrive without the legacy banking system's involvement.  Watch gaming communities and see what i mean...there are no tax collectors or banking oligopolies to destroy...and it is a place where the banks and those greedy assholes who have CAUSED our problems will have ine hell of a time "regulating". 

I very much question these panels...because these people almost seem like they are picked with the specific purpose of telling people "just ask the current regime how you are allowed to disrupt them...or let them disrupt themselves!"

The question we SHOULD be asking is why they need disrupted in the first place imho. 

As far as politicising it...99.9% of earths population is a direct victim of the current monetary regime and this is something scores of people i meet seem to understand (even if they disagree with me on other political issues).  I truly dont think we will have a problem if we can show people AND TEACH them the value of what we are doing. 

This is precisely why i would love to see a team of people working for brownies under xeroc for constructing documentation, tutorials and maybe even eventually a bitshares school. 

Lets us remember there were panels of "experts" all throughout history who told disruptors to "not be political" and "let the current rulers lead this"...because they are the ones "qualified" and the rest of the world "wasnt ready".

I havent watched all of it yet, but i think one thing they are missing is that what matters MOST is not that the technology goes viral and makes us all filthy rich....but rather that we build it and use it for the RIGHT reasons.

Sometimes it isnt the fastest that wins the race...especially if going fast means you overlook the dangerous roadblocks and paths.  Just look at the internet.  Perhaps if we had more philosophical debate early on...we wouldnt be looking at the internet also being the most dangerous panopticon it currently has been constructed to become...

Well said fuzzy, youhit the nail on the head.

There is SOME truth in this peice, but the little nuggest of poison in it will kill us.  Fuzzy was right on.

Well said fuzzy. Perfect. Making the effort to do things for the right reason, thereby, building something resilient, is the only worthwhile objective and is the only path worthy of the technology. I'm sure their commentary was well mean't, however, it seemed to lack vision, imagination and depth. It had a kind of soporific affect on me. A system that people can trust over time is anathema to those with power because all their existing systems are confidence games. Everyone seems to be fretting about timescales and yes, it would be nice if those providing the development capital get to see a return. But the reality is, if the core principals, driven by the integrity of this community who continue to insist on producing tools that maximise the natural integrity of the underlying protocol, and it takes 100 years to reach mass adoption, then so be it. I hope it's sooner for all our sakes.

thinking like this is going to put big marks on our heads though...so we should all be prepared to protect one another...

Maybe. But we're only doing what the say they want to do ....yet fail.  They will benefit them as much as anyone, including their own progeny. 

[fuzzy]

Ive said it once and will say it here again...
The gaming demographic is where we will hit it big.  Everyone plays games at some point in time and gamers are a growing and Crypto-capablr userbase demographic.  No we do not need the current system to use us...economies ON THE INTERNET will grow and thrive without the legacy banking system's involvement.  Watch gaming communities and see what i mean...there are no tax collectors or banking oligopolies to destroy...and it is a place where the banks and those greedy assholes who have CAUSED our problems will have ine hell of a time "regulating". 

I very much question these panels...because these people almost seem like they are picked with the specific purpose of telling people "just ask the current regime how you are allowed to disrupt them...or let them disrupt themselves!"

The question we SHOULD be asking is why they need disrupted in the first place imho. 

As far as politicising it...99.9% of earths population is a direct victim of the current monetary regime and this is something scores of people i meet seem to understand (even if they disagree with me on other political issues).  I truly dont think we will have a problem if we can show people AND TEACH them the value of what we are doing. 

This is precisely why i would love to see a team of people working for brownies under xeroc for constructing documentation, tutorials and maybe even eventually a bitshares school. 

Lets us remember there were panels of "experts" all throughout history who told disruptors to "not be political" and "let the current rulers lead this"...because they are the ones "qualified" and the rest of the world "wasnt ready".

I havent watched all of it yet, but i think one thing they are missing is that what matters MOST is not that the technology goes viral and makes us all filthy rich....but rather that we build it and use it for the RIGHT reasons.

Sometimes it isnt the fastest that wins the race...especially if going fast means you overlook the dangerous roadblocks and paths.  Just look at the internet.  Perhaps if we had more philosophical debate early on...we wouldnt be looking at the internet also being the most dangerous panopticon it currently has been constructed to become...

Well said fuzzy, youhit the nail on the head.

There is SOME truth in this peice, but the little nuggest of poison in it will kill us.  Fuzzy was right on.

Well said fuzzy. Perfect. Making the effort to do things for the right reason, thereby, building something resilient, is the only worthwhile objective and is the only path worthy of the technology. I'm sure their commentary was well mean't, however, it seemed to lack vision, imagination and depth. It had a kind of soporific affect on me. A system that people can trust over time is anathema to those with power because all their existing systems are confidence games. Everyone seems to be fretting about timescales and yes, it would be nice if those providing the development capital get to see a return. But the reality is, if the core principals, driven by the integrity of this community who continue to insist on producing tools that maximise the natural integrity of the underlying protocol, and it takes 100 years to reach mass adoption, then so be it. I hope it's sooner for all our sakes.

thinking like this is going to put big marks on our heads though...so we should all be prepared to protect one another...

[Ben Mason]

Ive said it once and will say it here again...
The gaming demographic is where we will hit it big.  Everyone plays games at some point in time and gamers are a growing and Crypto-capablr userbase demographic.  No we do not need the current system to use us...economies ON THE INTERNET will grow and thrive without the legacy banking system's involvement.  Watch gaming communities and see what i mean...there are no tax collectors or banking oligopolies to destroy...and it is a place where the banks and those greedy assholes who have CAUSED our problems will have ine hell of a time "regulating". 

I very much question these panels...because these people almost seem like they are picked with the specific purpose of telling people "just ask the current regime how you are allowed to disrupt them...or let them disrupt themselves!"

The question we SHOULD be asking is why they need disrupted in the first place imho. 

As far as politicising it...99.9% of earths population is a direct victim of the current monetary regime and this is something scores of people i meet seem to understand (even if they disagree with me on other political issues).  I truly dont think we will have a problem if we can show people AND TEACH them the value of what we are doing. 

This is precisely why i would love to see a team of people working for brownies under xeroc for constructing documentation, tutorials and maybe even eventually a bitshares school. 

Lets us remember there were panels of "experts" all throughout history who told disruptors to "not be political" and "let the current rulers lead this"...because they are the ones "qualified" and the rest of the world "wasnt ready".

I havent watched all of it yet, but i think one thing they are missing is that what matters MOST is not that the technology goes viral and makes us all filthy rich....but rather that we build it and use it for the RIGHT reasons.

Sometimes it isnt the fastest that wins the race...especially if going fast means you overlook the dangerous roadblocks and paths.  Just look at the internet.  Perhaps if we had more philosophical debate early on...we wouldnt be looking at the internet also being the most dangerous panopticon it currently has been constructed to become...

Well said fuzzy, youhit the nail on the head.

There is SOME truth in this peice, but the little nuggest of poison in it will kill us.  Fuzzy was right on.

Well said fuzzy. Perfect. Making the effort to do things for the right reason, thereby, building something resilient, is the only worthwhile objective and is the only path worthy of the technology. I'm sure their commentary was well mean't, however, it seemed to lack vision, imagination and depth. It had a kind of soporific affect on me. A system that people can trust over time is anathema to those with power because all their existing systems are confidence games. Everyone seems to be fretting about timescales and yes, it would be nice if those providing the development capital get to see a return. But the reality is, if the core principals, driven by the integrity of this community who continue to insist on producing tools that maximise the natural integrity of the underlying protocol, and it takes 100 years to reach mass adoption, then so be it. I hope it's sooner for all our sakes.

[Tuck Fheman]

I watched live last night and wondered why Brock Pierce was still relevant to the ecosystem, otherwise I thought it was OK.

I probably listen to too many of these and felt like it was mostly regurgitated info previously said by others. 

[Thom]

Ive said it once and will say it here again...
The gaming demographic is where we will hit it big.  Everyone plays games at some point in time and gamers are a growing and Crypto-capablr userbase demographic.  No we do not need the current system to use us...economies ON THE INTERNET will grow and thrive without the legacy banking system's involvement.  Watch gaming communities and see what i mean...there are no tax collectors or banking oligopolies to destroy...and it is a place where the banks and those greedy assholes who have CAUSED our problems will have ine hell of a time "regulating". 

I very much question these panels...because these people almost seem like they are picked with the specific purpose of telling people "just ask the current regime how you are allowed to disrupt them...or let them disrupt themselves!"

The question we SHOULD be asking is why they need disrupted in the first place imho. 

As far as politicising it...99.9% of earths population is a direct victim of the current monetary regime and this is something scores of people i meet seem to understand (even if they disagree with me on other political issues).  I truly dont think we will have a problem if we can show people AND TEACH them the value of what we are doing. 

This is precisely why i would love to see a team of people working for brownies under xeroc for constructing documentation, tutorials and maybe even eventually a bitshares school. 

Lets us remember there were panels of "experts" all throughout history who told disruptors to "not be political" and "let the current rulers lead this"...because they are the ones "qualified" and the rest of the world "wasnt ready".

I havent watched all of it yet, but i think one thing they are missing is that what matters MOST is not that the technology goes viral and makes us all filthy rich....but rather that we build it and use it for the RIGHT reasons.

Sometimes it isnt the fastest that wins the race...especially if going fast means you overlook the dangerous roadblocks and paths.  Just look at the internet.  Perhaps if we had more philosophical debate early on...we wouldnt be looking at the internet also being the most dangerous panopticon it currently has been constructed to become...

Well said fuzzy, youhit the nail on the head.

There is SOME truth in this peice, but the little nuggest of poison in it will kill us.  Fuzzy was right on.

[BunkerChainLabs-DataSecurityNode]

On it.

[fuzzy]

Bitmaster, my take-ways from this most interesting discussion:

1) The initial market wave of Bitcoin is over and along with it, gone is the hope of the Blitzkrieg   (overwhelming speed in achieving market share that will disrupt and set off balance the the very formidable competitors in the financial space)   tactic  for success.    Success will take longer than expected and will require wise stealth maneuvers and partnerships with the very industries seeking to be disrupted. 

2) consumer adoption is not where the crypto success will happen(first), the learning curve is currently too steep for the mass market.   I will be with the commercial organizations (Fortune 2000?) that can really see and appreciate value creation to business bottom line.

Stop trying to storm the Bastille:  Disruption of Finance technology will not happen without the acceptance/involvement of the entrenched financial oligopolies.  Stealth tactics and strategic partnerships are essential to make the change desired.  Talk of destroying the banks is not helpful when they are holding all the cards.  Need to make it very easy and very very tempting (lucrative) for them to disrupt themselves with the new tech. 

3) Public block changes are not inherently better or more sacred than private block changes

4) Ideology  needs to be kept far, far way from the promotion of blockchain technology products.     If the product will bring libertarian “freedom” then let the product speak for itself and let freedom be a bi- product of its success.  Idiology, no mater how good,  is divisive and does not help product promotion. 

5)  Techno-speak needs to be kept far, far way from the promotion of blockchain technology products.   

Much like the switch of the telecoms from wire to Voice over IP, it is easier for market acceptance if crypto and all the associated complexities remain under the hood, unseen.

more like a car salesman talking about details of the latest engine tech: piston compression, cylinder arrangements, cam lobes ect, it  only confuses the customer that wants to hear about the smooth ride and great handling.  They can careless how it is accomplished.  Therefore market approach needs to be about how the product can improve the things in the “real world” that the customer is already doing.  They must be able to relate to your proposal and fit it into their current needs or current actions.   A firm link must be make between blockchain technology that solves real world issues (not ideological ones).  The blockchain industry needs to reach out and connect with the wider world not continue to recirculate business and ideas within it self.

6) The “killer app” (that most likely will incorporate the charictaritics above) is becoming over-due.   and is desperately needed.  Without it the adoption horizon will be exponentially longer and may miss the window for mass adoption. 

7) Need to learn from the multiple Bitcoin marketing blunders.  One being the use of the same name for the token and the infrastructure. 

Blockchain technology is badly in need of marketing professionals that can effectively relay value proposition, brought be blockchain, to the broader market

Ive said it once and will say it here again...
The gaming demographic is where we will hit it big.  Everyone plays games at some point in time and gamers are a growing and Crypto-capablr userbase demographic.  No we do not need the current system to use us...economies ON THE INTERNET will grow and thrive without the legacy banking system's involvement.  Watch gaming communities and see what i mean...there are no tax collectors or banking oligopolies to destroy...and it is a place where the banks and those greedy assholes who have CAUSED our problems will have ine hell of a time "regulating". 

I very much question these panels...because these people almost seem like they are picked with the specific purpose of telling people "just ask the current regime how you are allowed to disrupt them...or let them disrupt themselves!"

The question we SHOULD be asking is why they need disrupted in the first place imho. 

As far as politicising it...99.9% of earths population is a direct victim of the current monetary regime and this is something scores of people i meet seem to understand (even if they disagree with me on other political issues).  I truly dont think we will have a problem if we can show people AND TEACH them the value of what we are doing. 

This is precisely why i would love to see a team of people working for brownies under xeroc for constructing documentation, tutorials and maybe even eventually a bitshares school. 

Lets us remember there were panels of "experts" all throughout history who told disruptors to "not be political" and "let the current rulers lead this"...because they are the ones "qualified" and the rest of the world "wasnt ready".

I havent watched all of it yet, but i think one thing they are missing is that what matters MOST is not that the technology goes viral and makes us all filthy rich....but rather that we build it and use it for the RIGHT reasons.

Sometimes it isnt the fastest that wins the race...especially if going fast means you overlook the dangerous roadblocks and paths.  Just look at the internet.  Perhaps if we had more philosophical debate early on...we wouldnt be looking at the internet also being the most dangerous panopticon it currently has been constructed to become...

[eagleeye]

The killer app will be when a successful crypto incorporates email to email transfer, piggy backing on paypals success.

[topcandle]

give the man some brownie pts!

[James212]

Bitmaster, my take-ways from this most interesting discussion:

1) The initial market wave of Bitcoin is over and along with it, gone is the hope of the Blitzkrieg   (overwhelming speed in achieving market share that will disrupt and set off balance the the very formidable competitors in the financial space)   tactic  for success.    Success will take longer than expected and will require wise stealth maneuvers and partnerships with the very industries seeking to be disrupted. 

2) consumer adoption is not where the crypto success will happen(first), the learning curve is currently too steep for the mass market.   I will be with the commercial organizations (Fortune 2000?) that can really see and appreciate value creation to business bottom line.

Stop trying to storm the Bastille:  Disruption of Finance technology will not happen without the acceptance/involvement of the entrenched financial oligopolies.  Stealth tactics and strategic partnerships are essential to make the change desired.  Talk of destroying the banks is not helpful when they are holding all the cards.  Need to make it very easy and very very tempting (lucrative) for them to disrupt themselves with the new tech. 

3) Public block changes are not inherently better or more sacred than private block changes

4) Ideology  needs to be kept far, far way from the promotion of blockchain technology products.     If the product will bring libertarian “freedom” then let the product speak for itself and let freedom be a bi- product of its success.  Idiology, no mater how good,  is divisive and does not help product promotion. 

5)  Techno-speak needs to be kept far, far way from the promotion of blockchain technology products.   

Much like the switch of the telecoms from wire to Voice over IP, it is easier for market acceptance if crypto and all the associated complexities remain under the hood, unseen.

more like a car salesman talking about details of the latest engine tech: piston compression, cylinder arrangements, cam lobes ect, it  only confuses the customer that wants to hear about the smooth ride and great handling.  They can careless how it is accomplished.  Therefore market approach needs to be about how the product can improve the things in the “real world” that the customer is already doing.  They must be able to relate to your proposal and fit it into their current needs or current actions.   A firm link must be make between blockchain technology that solves real world issues (not ideological ones).  The blockchain industry needs to reach out and connect with the wider world not continue to recirculate business and ideas within it self.

6) The “killer app” (that most likely will incorporate the charictaritics above) is becoming over-due.   and is desperately needed.  Without it the adoption horizon will be exponentially longer and may miss the window for mass adoption. 

7) Need to learn from the multiple Bitcoin marketing blunders.  One being the use of the same name for the token and the infrastructure. 

Blockchain technology is badly in need of marketing professionals that can effectively relay value proposition, brought be blockchain, to the broader market

[bytemaster]

Can you summarize this for me?