SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Motherboard reports on a strange Bitcoin "lottery" that is now claimed to be a marriage proposal.
Strange event #1: someone claiming to be the anonymous hacker who stole 119,000 Bitcoins from the Bitfinex Bitcoin exchange announced a "lottery" to win 1000 Bitcoins on Reddit, garnering over 7000 responses on the thread from people posting their Bitcoin addresses on the chance that this was somehow legit.
Strange event #2: the Reddit poster actually sent 1000 Bitcoins to the address of one of the users in the thread. Almost immediately the money was sent from that destination to yet another address, one with a public note attached that says "Please send me some money. I'm very poor."
Strange event #3: the poster on Reddit who received the money emerged, admitted to knowing the original poster (not surprising), and revealed that somehow this entire event is some sort of wedding proposal to her (very surprising).
I'm not sure what to think of this. If it's a scam I'm not quite sure who got ripped off.
Previous Coverage: Bitcoin Exchange Bitfinex has been hacked. 119,756 BTC Stolen
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday August 19 2016, @07:51PM
According to that standard, I maintain you have no emotions. Otherwise, show me your emotions. No, don't show me facial expressions. Don't show me specific sounds of the voice.
What you are saying, then, is that money only exists if I exist? Or only if I "feel" money exists? Ah, I think we have found the urquell of the goldbug! Darn solipsists!
My point was that money does not "exist" independently of economic exchange, or that is, of human activity. So money is not an "object" in the world as such, it is a convention, an arbitrary sign, or that is, fiat. The residual value of whatever is chosen by social convention to represent "money" is not really a factor that should determine what is so chosen.
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Saturday August 20 2016, @05:55PM
My point was that money does not "exist" independently of economic exchange, or that is, of human activity. So money is not an "object" in the world as such, it is a convention, an arbitrary sign, or that is, fiat. The residual value of whatever is chosen by social convention to represent "money" is not really a factor that should determine what is so chosen.
But we're not sure WHY you are making this point. Nobody has argued otherwise. And its not the issue.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday August 20 2016, @06:27PM
Nobody has argued otherwise. And its not the issue
Agreed. I thought someone was making a point against fiat currency. BTW, how does a cryptographical scarcity function to replace physical scarcity in the bitcoin vs. gold equation? Isn't the main argument against fiat currency is that the issuing authority can release as much as they want? Isn't the fear over inflation a worry about residual value? But yes, topic closed. Was not the issue. I assume we are not getting married, now?
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Sunday August 21 2016, @05:29AM
BTW, how does a cryptographical scarcity function to replace physical scarcity in the bitcoin vs. gold equation?
As I see it, If a major world economy went bitcoin...
As the GDP of that economy goes up and the coins remain at relatively fixed scarcity; the price of goods is forced down. (Ie the buying power of one coin keeps going up... the currency seems to be inherently deflationary.
There are a lot of issues with a deflationary currency, not least of which, people are motivated not to spend or invest, since the coins will be worth more tomorrow, and still more the day after that. Deflation tends to stall economies.
I assume we are not getting married, now?
Always a bridesmaid, never a bride.