Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, what's a financial bubble? Explanations in 5 minutes chrono!

[Christophe]

The BTC market is worth over $ 1000 trillion ...

How much is the capitalization of the Paris Bourse?

[Christophe]

[Ahmed]

For those who think that 5 minutes is insufficient to understand what Bitcoin is and who are also very determined, here is a doctoral thesis in information and communication sciences, very sturdy, as we like them :
https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02493223/document

[Exnihiloest]

... I advocate cyber-financial speculation and you say I'm anti-capitalist red trend 2.0?

I simply want the good of the people and the end of the monetary oligarchy!

How beautiful it is. As Luchini said, me too "I would like to be on the left but it requires so many human qualities"

Speculation is not capitalism, but anti-capitalism. Your speculation is low finance, not capitalism. In capitalism, finance must be at the service of production. It is not because the system has been deviated that it should be deviated even further, and in addition by claiming to speak for the good of the people. I hope that was irony, because otherwise it would be abject.

[Exnihiloest]

For those who think that 5 minutes is insufficient to understand what Bitcoin is and who are also very determined, here is a doctoral thesis in information and communication sciences, very sturdy, as we like them :
https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02493223/document

It looks interesting, 5 minutes probably too little indeed, but on the contrary, 353 pages, there I admit that I give up.
Could you give us a little summary of the essential points?

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

For those who think that 5 minutes is insufficient to understand what Bitcoin is and who are also very determined, here is a doctoral thesis in information and communication sciences, very sturdy, as we like them :
https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02493223/document

It looks interesting, 5 minutes probably too little indeed, but on the contrary, 353 pages, there I admit that I give up.
Could you give us a little summary of the essential points?

Not even damn reading the table of contents.

[Ahmed]

Bitcoin is only an illustration in support of this thesis. The author starts from the principle that the eviction of human labor due to increasing productivity no longer allows the self-valuation of a growing mass of accumulated capital within a particular social synthesis within which only these categories make sense. It is therefore necessary to have recourse to the hypothetical work which would be produced in the future, a supposition which can only lead to illusion as long as there are somewhat credible "carriers of hope" for a later realization (which is currently being played out with the bubble. hydrogen). An empowerment of the financial sphere was the consequence and it comes to lend a hand to "real" production (which previously played this role). Bitcoin is part of this development which strives to circumvent the contradiction between decrease in the abstract value contained in commodities and the need for capital accumulation (therefore increase in total value). But the most important relates to the adequacy between digital techniques, indifferent to content, although still applying to specific cases, from neutral procedures and a certain state of society where these techniques make it possible to push back to a higher level functional contradiction, without the latter leaving the domain of the unthought.
An interesting point is that "mining" requires as much energy as to guarantee the security of transactions by discouraging fraudulent attempts which therefore prove to be unprofitable. It is a pity that what is at stake in the notion of the maximum mass of Bitcoin is not explained ...
This monetary attempt is to be linked to the libertarian current where we would rely on algorithms instead of the State, even if the institutions are tempted to get on the train (as long as it is running ...). ..

[Exnihiloest]

Thank you for your return, Ahmed, even if I do not have all the codes of the economy so that it is completely clear to me, in particular I do not see why the reduction of human labor would slow down the valuation of capital. So Bitcoin would be a rather positive contribution. A libertarian current is indeed desirable, when we see to what extent states now decide everything, even in our private life. As long as they remain public, and this is the case it seems to me for bitcoin, algorithms seem a good alternative to uninspired decision-makers and institutional manipulators.

[Ahmed]

If the quantity of human labor per unit of product decreases *, the "abstract" value ** also decreases, which leads to an increase in the total mass of products to counter this social reality, hence the disposable and the resulting pollution. are the inevitable consequences. Fortunately (?), The use of fictitious human labor, which is supposed to occur in the future, partly (and above all temporarily) remedies this limitation.
On the second point, the fact of relying on an algorithm rather than on institutions does not in any way constitute emancipation (since it is a way of getting rid of the collective management of money), it is 'all the more true as various institutions are closely interested in digital currencies.

* This is due to the increase in productivity which itself results from competition between economic agents.
** I put parentheses in abstraction, but a value is necessarily abstract in essence (even if it can rest on a concrete substrate). The origin of the value has been explained by Ricardo, but without him yet understanding all the subtlety and especially the limitations.

[Exnihiloest]

If the quantity of human labor per unit of product decreases *, the "abstract" value ** also decreases, which leads to an increase in the total mass of products to counter this social reality, hence the disposable and the resulting pollution. are the inevitable consequences. Fortunately (?), The use of fictitious human labor, which is supposed to occur in the future, partly (and above all temporarily) remedies this limitation.
On the second point, the fact of relying on an algorithm rather than on institutions does not in any way constitute emancipation (since it is a way of getting rid of the collective management of money), it is 'all the more true as various institutions are closely interested in digital currencies.

* This is due to the increase in productivity which itself results from competition between economic agents.
** I put parentheses in abstraction, but a value is necessarily abstract in essence (even if it can rest on a concrete substrate). The origin of the value has been explained by Ricardo, but without him yet understanding all the subtlety and especially the limitations.

The total mass of products is however limited by the capacity of the populations to absorb it. On the other hand, the reduction of human labor does not presume the quantity of average labor necessary for production, which can be greater when targeting complex products. I am all the more optimistic that the disposable that you assume as a palliative is not necessarily attractive for the buyer, and that flooding it could have a counterproductive effect. Using an electric razor means avoiding multiple purchases of mechanical razors, you save time, in terms of shopping or ordering online. The practical side is not necessarily the disposable side.

As for the algos in the field of governance, as long as it is under the control of the citizen, it is not more than before a confiscation of his emancipation. On the contrary, since the reason for a decision can be traced, we can have an objective control, and make the algorithms evolve on a collective decision according to the orientations that we want to give to the company.