Alexander Hamilton v. Satoshi Nakamoto Rap Battle

It’s not Hayek v. Keynes but both Hamilton and Satoshi lay down some hard lyric in their rap battle, a project of Reid Hoffman.

Comments

meanwhile
we reckon david brooks & the newyorktimes.com
went from being a pretty good newspaper
to a pretty poor pair of poopy pop psychologists!
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/05/opinion/internet-extremism.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

After a few weeks under international pressure, Brazil is regaining momentum. Brazil's Economy Minister, millionaire Mr. Guedes, has offically declared that France's First Lady, Brigitte Macron, is pretty ugly, and his husband, Monsieur Macron is envies Brazil's President Captain Bolsonaro. Brazil's new assertive behaviour is seen as evidence that, as the country's free market reforms suceed, it has fewer reasons to care about foreign aggression.

This is humor I hope, on account of I cannot stop laughing.

senor ribby
do you understand this cryptocurrency
stuff?

I don't understand it either...hard to imagine how it will ever gain widespread adoption..fiat currency regime seems headed for a black hole..damned if you do damned if you don't...

mebbe cryptocurrency is a hedge against postmodern monetary theory&
paul printmoremoney krugman ?

As an investor, it would seem to me that both Alex and Satoshi made some good points. The obvious solution from an investment perspective is to diversify. Owning some (percentage greater than zero) fiat assets and crypto assets seems to be optimal rather than one or the other. Owning only one or the other seems quite foolish. I'm not sure why you'd own only one type of asset exclusively.

Fiat money created by central banks is inflationary with no limits on creation. It's debt based created out of thin air by a private banking cartel who are not a part of the government, not answerable to the people.

Bitcoin on the other hand has a fixed, diminishing small inflation rate with a fixed total amount of 21 million ever to be created. It is decentralized not controlled by any government or private company or cartel. It is borderless, censorship resistant and permissionless. Anyone in the world who has access to the internet can own and use bitcoin without their countries permission. Bitcoin is neutral. It does not have a political system and does not discriminate against any person or group based on their age, race, gender, economic or social status or political views.

Bitcoin is not here to replace private central banks or their Fiat money systems. They can peacefully coexist, bitcoin is just a revolutionary alternative that frees people from their own countries Monopoly monetary systems. It adds a bit of economic freedom for those who choose to use it.

Dunning-Kuggerands are cosplay-currency for people who caught the highschool-Rand brainworms.

Okay so there are only, ever 21 million bitcoin. Great, what exactly is going to limit other crypto currencies from growing? What exactly is going to let people know which crypto is going to retain value and be useful?

Currently Bitcoin appears to be holding value better than other crypto assets, yet people who understand this far better than me tell me that Bitcoin is far from the best crypto from a technical point of view.

This suggests to me that Bitcoin is riding more off its status as first mover and hype rather than technical standards. It also suggests to me "limited to 21 million" is also basically meaningless, if people decide merely to duplicate the algorithm we have little but a popularity contest backing the asset. Also, I do wonder about stranded cash. It seems likely that everyday a certain number of bitcoins become irrevocably lost (e.g. the key holder dies and the key is lost). This suggests that rather than have a fixed upper bound, Bitcoin is terminally declining resource. Eventually enough Bitcoin will become stranded with lost keys that the currency ceases to function.

So an easily duplicated algorithm with a built in expiration date (even if it is centuries hence) seems unlikely to be any more stable than fiat in the long run.

The winner is team Satoshi Nakamoto (e.g. Hal Finney, Adam Back, etc.).

It probably would have been too expensive to produce and required too many permissions, but I wish they'd had the Satoshi character's face keep changing between plausible candidates (Hal Finney, Adam Back, Nick Szabo, etc.).

50% Hamilton vs 50% Nakamoto, still deciding which one is better...

I think the thought of investing in cryptocurrency isn't such a bad idea as long as you're ok with the risks that may or may not come with it.

Music was lame but lyrics good.

You needed the team that produced "Epic Rap Battles in History", some of their better ones I keep in my hard drive.

Here's one that's pretty good on patents:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ1Mz7kGVf0

(Nikola Tesla vs Thomas Edison. Epic Rap Battles of History)

(Note the triple pun at the end, clever)

Alexander Hamilton one I choose Bitcoin over Fiat any day but the better battle rapper was Hamilton

The weakest part of the video was all those hammy reaction shots from audience members. Are those there as part of some Kickstarter reward program?

I have no audio, anyone got a transcript?

Anyway, it is all a simple choice between paper and digital. Other than digital bearer assets, the two are similar enough. Swift is the fiat ledger, works fine in private or public hands.

The real change in finance is Fintech, which tends to automate trading. I would focus on that if I want to see big changes in money tech.

A lot of that innovation seems to just be people realizing that publishing sequential data with hash chains is a useful trick, because it makes it impossible for the publisher to change things without leaving evidence of the change.

Comments for this post are closed