Видео

When will my wages go up?

You make 1 big mistake: Deflation in an inflationary system is worse... Yes. But Deflation in an deflationary system is fine as proven by history and countless societies based on gold. In a deflationary system no-one would have a mortgage or high debts as its not feasible and a house would not be an asset anymore (as many more things). People would buy a house when they have the liquidity (driving down housing prices oyeah and bye banks) and the deflation does not take the money of people who can only afford to save in money instead of assets. Also only productive asset will be assets in a deflationary system increase productivity massively cause bankruptcy would happen quick if not productive, less painfull and less zombie companies. But again in the current inflationary system with high debts this is more difficult

Well when prices can only continue to go up through adding more and more debt government, corporations,and private individuals Then technology starts pushing prices down faster than debt can be added. Catastrophic outcomes.

Technically, there are nonagenarians alive who remember the Great Depression. That was the last significant bout of deflation in the US. And it kind of proves your point. The Great Depression was horribly miserable.

I say bring it on.

Although it doesn't change your argument, the unemployment rate is calculated much differently today than it was up until the 1980s. Therefore, calculating the misery index in the 1980s, would lead to a much different (and likely higher) number than would be calculated today, assuming the same rate of inflation.

Hello Kartik, Are you planning to add videos on this playlist soon?

I'm not going to cry for people who borrowed their way into ruin. Deflation was the catalyst for the creation of the middle class by rewarding the prudent and thoughtful. Modern monetary theory is a siphon on the wealth of savers into the pockets of the wealthy at the behest of the avarice. A penny saved is a penny earned cannot occur in a society of rampant inflation.

Deflation has no incentive to take risk

This is an AI Audio remastering of an older video : ruclips.net/video/-dYJRpGp5ac/видео.html At that time, I used terms like 'Egghead' to describe hypertheoretical opinions. I have since stopped using that term, but old footage that is repurposed will still have it.

Thank you very much Kartik

Very impressive but you dont say how the video jas been AI remastered? Was is a specific AI software?

Did you finished 'The Singularity is Nearer' ? You said you was reading it months ago but i didnt saw your book review

All hail (Δ(Δx))

What do you think about the aging population issue in the developed world. Will technology find a way to combat this issue?

People just can't grasp this . especially when the default for people is to assume change is bad. Especially if it means people don't really have to work that hard.

Industry Energy Consumption (TWh/year) CO2 Emissions (million metric tons/year) Bitcoin 105-130 22-57 Gold Mining ~240 ~126 Banking Sector ~238 ~130

Oh, I know inequality -- I know it dearly. There are a multitude of dimensions -- each dimension with its own spectrum. There is the dimension of IQ - raw objectively measured intelligence -- ranging from the creative genius to the dullard ... and all of the masses somewhere in the middle of that bell curve. The dimension of ambition, ranging in results from the internationally accomplished (ask me about the mountains that I have climbed sometime:) to the slothen feckless breeders. The dimensions of initiative, of grit, of vision, of perspicacity. The exercised relationship with time, also called impulsivity -- think delayed gratification vs "hit it and quit it." There are the producers and the parasites. The savers and the spenders. The accountable and the reckless. The strong vs the weak ... think of those that run 100 miler ultra-endurance events compared to those that, somehow, cannot afford themselves the time to simply "put the bottle down" (the poor dears have a "disease" called "alcoholism"). Sigh. It is a dismal affair to have to bear the burden of carrying the weight of the feckless dross. The antidote, of course, for the producers, is to simply shrug.

Yesterday I put 2 comments here which seem to have been deleted? Were they deleted by you? It was about the questionable figure you mentioned that 1/4 -1/3 of crypto transactions are related to crime and that bitcoin will become practically worthless once miners don’t find it financially viable. Actually there’s a difficulty mechanism to protect against this where mining difficulty will increase and decrease to incentivise appropriately

I'm not sure I understand your point about mining being bad for the environment. Isn't it the government's responsibility to regulate the carbon footprint of different sectors? Bitcoin mining can actually be done in places where there is excess or unused energy, like runoff energy from certain industries, that would otherwise go to waste.

I'm sorry sir, but I think your points on this paper are out of date. Bitcoin miners prefer waste energy and don't generally take from the consumer grid. Saying the bitcoin wastes energy is not correct. Bitcoin uses energy that was already wasted. Also, Larry Fink dismissed the criminal activity as normal for any technology on CNBC. The industrial use case for bitcoin has been proven. Sure, bitcoin isn't a unit of account yet. But it will be soon, and then the free market will revert to its natural state, deflationary. The Bitcoin network is fundamentally different than property rights databases. Bitcoin is decentralized and the later is controlled by corporations. I prefer a free and fair global market over nation state, legally siloed, corporate control. Fiat currency will inflate and bitcoin will become the most stable money on the planet. See: How Money & Banking Work (& why they're broken today) - Lyn Alden ruclips.net/video/jk_HWmmwiAs/видео.html BlackRock CEO Larry Fink: I believe bitcoin is a legit financial instrument ruclips.net/video/K4ciiDyUvUo/видео.html www.weforum.org/videos/this-start-up-catches-waste-methane-to-power-data-centres/ An integrated landfill gas-to-energy and Bitcoin mining framework www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652624029652 time.com/7017395/bitcoin-data-center-heat-bathhouses/ Blockchain-based management of demand response in electric energy grids: A systematic review www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352484723003827 www.forbes.com/sites/abubakarnurkhalil/2023/05/24/africans-are-pioneering-the-bright-yet-complicated-green-future-of-bitcoin-mining/

Gosh, I was looking for some valid arguments against Bitcoin but all you do in this video is proof how little you know about it. I suggest you do some more homework. Here are your main mistakes: 1. You pretend that mining is an inefficient form of transaction validation, when in realty miners do not validate transactions but they secure the network by increasing the costs for dishonest players. The USD does that by having a huge army and they use even more energy. 2. You saying Bitcoin is not scarce because there are other cryptocurrencies is like saying gold is not scarce because there are other metals. 3. You then continue by saying that Bitcoin is the first digital money, which it is not. There were dozens other attempts decades earlier (e.g. DigiCash in 1989 and E-Gold in 1996). Moreover Bitcoin is not successful because of its software, but because of its censorship resistance as a result of its decentralized, difficulty adjusted proof of work network. 4. Finally you say that Bitcoin is very useful for criminals because of its anonymity. This is probably the most ridiculous argument of them all because it's an open blockchain, you can literally see every single transaction on sites like mempool.space.

I think you should branch out from mainstream media sources for your information and explore topics more deeply than just from one narrative. But feel free to ignore it just like the people who ignored gunpowder.

Not even wrong.

The older humans don't want the younger humans to have nice things 😂

Soylent Green was a movie I greatly enjoyed when it came out, and it brings back lots of memories! It depicted a nightmare scenario by the 2020s that many so-called environmentalists at the time believed in. Environmentalism (now "Climate Change") is a cult that promotes the belief that things are getting worse, not better, and that an environmental and ecological collapse is just around the corner. They believed in an "ozone hole" catastrophe in the 80s and 90s, a "global cooling" catastrophe in the 1990s, and a "global warming" catastrophe from about 2000 onward (remember Al Gore's "temperature hockey stick" graph? Another failed prediction.). We should have been killed-off at least half a dozen times by now if the predictions of the climate change aka environmental cultists were correct.

What an utter rubbish for a 1973 Sci-Fi film. Can't even compare with Zardoz from the very same year, which even today looks like a manifest of alt-right and contains a lot of punches towards transhumanism.

This is a bad take. If you think BTC is for criminals and will go to zero, consequently you should drop all dollars, because it's used for 99,9% of all criminal activities and will go to zero guaranteed. If you disagree, you might also have to rethink your stance on BTC. Then again, whatever a currency is used for bad or good is irrelevant and just show that whoever brings that up acts from an imagined position of higher morale. The whole point of a currency is its usefulness as meanings of exchange, store of value or unit of account. The dollar is not really good at at least 2 of these things. Still useful. As is BTC. And for most poeple that's the whole point of using it. That won't go away any time soon. No matter what political view or ideologiy you are trying to push.

1) most of the fiat currency r very broken, they r going to zero like the roman currency or the once great brit pound. 2) BTC offers the best alternative for transfer of value, Globally .. .3) criminal activity happens in fiat FAR MORE than BTC .. .4) the energy is better spent on BTC than the hundreds of thousands of banks supporting a broken fiat currency 5) u can print counterfeit USD but try making a fake BTC

Oh dear. Most of these tired old arguments were addressed in another comment by @mikaelpetersen3331 so just a couple specific points: - Mining creates instant and flexible demand for stranded or otherwise unsalable energy. You need to think about the ramifications for a few days to really grasp the significance of this. Not only is it not wasteful, it CATALYZES energy projects and soaks up excess supply everywhere in the world. Ask yourself this: Why hasn't Africa become rich from filling the desert with solar panels? Because it would require an obscene amount of investment with slow return prospects to build infrastructure to take that energy to the buyers. The calculus on such projects completely changes when you add Bitcoin mining to the mix. One should not have an opinion on energy matters without even a basic understanding of the market, infrastructure, and logistics dynamics involved. Criticizing Bitcoin on the energy front is perhaps the most absurd and misguided "expert" taking point of this decade. - No, altcoins are not "more advanced", in fact recency bias is a much more common fallacy these days than the opposite so it's kinda funny seeing it thrown around as an argument while falling for the opposite mistake. Just like with energy, one needs to understand the game theoretical differences between consensus mechanisms. Proof of stake is not only not advanced, it actually defeats the very purpose of using a blockchain in the first place. It's not even comparable to proof of work, it's not apples oranges but rather apples to hand grenades. Sure, a grenade SEEMS similar to an apple, it might even seem more "advanced", excapt you can't eat it and it might blow up in your face instead.

A reasoned approach to these age old criticisms would reveal that they hold very little in terms of substance. 1) Talib is simply wrong when he asserts that it is a point against Bitcoin 'as a currency' that it is an object of speculation, because any asset which undergoes an adoption curve the like of Bitcoin will inevitably be the object of speculation. When you are an asset of neglible value that is suddenly dumped into an economic environment where you are designed to absorb perhaps 500 trillion in wealth over a number of decades, what crazy human being would *not* speculate on that asset? But once we get to the latter part of the adoption curve, speculation in Bitcoin will subisde and people will rather use it for stable savings than speculative purpose. 2) Your points about Bitcoin mining don't make any sense. Why do you say it is 'wasteful' and 'inefficient' ? Compared to what exactly? WHy wouldn't you want to spend 1/150 part of the worlds electricity to secure the arguably most important function in a modern economy: a transparent, censorship resistant, unconfiscateable money? What other mechanism that operates in accordance with the laws of nature do you propose which would be less 'wasteful' and less 'inefficient' to secure the most valuable monetary network on the planet, one day harboring north of hundreds of trillions of dollars? If you flip the script, suddenly mining becomes a beautiful and elegant and intensely ingenius, efficient solution. 3) The scarcity critique. So you mean to say USD doesnt hold any value because there are 200 other fiat currencies in the world and anyone could at any moment create more fiat currencies and therefore there is no point in appointing any value to USD? That is essentially your critique. If you ignore the very attributes of the protocol which separates Bitcoin from another so-called ''crypto currency'' then sure. But why would you ignore the unique attributes of the Bitcoin protocol? And how do you deam other protocols to be more 'advanced'? For what purpose exactly? More advanced in order to function as a censorship resistant unconfiscateable transparent absolutely scarce money? I dont think so. But sure, perhaps more ''advanced'' ie complicated when it comes to all other sort of matters. But that is not what Bitcoin is trying to do. Bitcoin protocol is designed to create one thing and one thing only: truly scarce censorship resistante unconfiscateable money/property that anyone can own across time and space and never have to ask permission to use. There is not a single altcoin in existance that is more 'advanced' than Bitcoin in doing this.

I think the mis-judgement here is about currency. in actual fact, Bitcoin is just digital property or asset that is ideally in someone or a groups custody. Currencies are a result of the derivation from gold a natural commodity, property or asset. Unfortunately, governments have severed the link between gold and their currencies and are able to manipulate the supply of the currencies either through Quantitative Easing (QE), Quantitative Tightening (QT) or Quantitative Hold (QH). A currency was once a nation state money (derivative of gold). if you understand this why would you want to hold on to your government's property, or better yet perform economic transactions with it?. In the trade by barter system, 2 economic actors traded against each other with their very own property vice versa without any government's instrument (very inefficient of-course) . Bitcoin is efficient barter system over a digital network, permissionless, unstoppable, un-censorable, self-governing, triple-entry book-keeping, easy auditable, known total supply, 10 mins settlement world wide for anyone with a internet connection, computing device with a funded wallet and last but not least uses a proof of work consensus algorithm to guarantee security and decentralisation.

Hello, I have a masters degree in economics, have worked as a software engineer for over 15 years and am a previous bitcoin skeptic who believed that the demand for it, at the margin, would eventually collapse as it would be surpassed by superior technology. As is commonly said, everyone starts as a bitcoin skeptic before they are for bitcoin. I can tell from your video that you have spent a considerable amount of time and energy invested in thinking through the arguments against bitcoin. I would encourage you to let go of your ego on this subject and approach it with a fresh set of eyes and an open mind. Just for the purposes of engaging with bitcoin from an open mind, try and let go of any training you received around Keynesian economics (or any associated form of macroeconomics), try and let go of the conventional definitions of inflation. One thing that you should do is try and approach bitcoin thinking strictly from a game theory perspective; from a game theoretic perspective which crypto network is a participant likely to want to either hold, or buy, and why? Think about network effects of different crypto networks, think of the security guarantees offered by different crypto networks. Think about what is it from a technical perspective that actually makes the network decentralized or not and why is it that decentralization is even a desirable quality. Think about the layered approach that the bitcoin ecosystem is taking to scaling the network, where bitcoin is a settlement layer and then higher level protocols handle payments (lightning network) and community banking (Fedimint and associated eCash protocols). Maybe engage with some of the writings of Austrian economists, such as Murray Rothbard, and try and approach the writing with an open mind that is free from any political biases that you may possess. Think about things like the Cantillon effect (people that are closer to the source of money creation have an outsized economic benefit compared to people that are farther from the source of money creation) and the impact that it is having on modern society. I'm confident that if you do all of these things and invest enough time in it, that you will come to the same conclusion as many of the bitcoiners. We all may have pre-determined ideas of how we think the world should work and does work. But a truly free market doesn't care what we want or what we think. People, and groups, follow their incentives and act independently to maximize their own long term welfare. And savers (not investors) will pick the money that allows them to preserve the fruits of their labor into the future the best. That is the reality of a truly free market.

My first time discovering an educated opponent of bitcoin. I’ve got some points which were actually just things I put to AI and I put in the comments. The only other thing I have to add about aside from those is that, although you’re no doubt an expert and informed about finance, I still don’t get your narrative and it seems to meander a little too much to be credible in my opinion. Finally, I think I’m more inclined to trust Larry Fink . Am I biased?

If there’s any way for you to do it, I’d love to see you debate this with Michael Saylor

The claim that 1/4 to 1/3 of cryptocurrency transactions are criminal in nature appears to be significantly higher than what most recent studies and reports suggest. It's important to examine the data and context surrounding the use of cryptocurrencies in illicit activities to clarify this point. ### Analysis of Cryptocurrency and Crime 1. **Overall Crime Rate**: According to reports from entities like Chainalysis, a blockchain analysis company that works closely with law enforcement to track cryptocurrency transactions, the percentage of crypto transactions involved in criminal activity is much lower than the figure suggested. For example, Chainalysis' 2022 report indicated that in 2021, illicit activity represented just around 0.15% of all cryptocurrency transaction volume. This percentage has generally been under 1% since they started reporting these figures in 2017. 2. **Types of Criminal Activities**: - **Scams and Fraud**: These are among the most common types of illicit activities involving cryptocurrencies. - **Darknet Markets**: Cryptocurrencies are used on darknet markets due to their perceived anonymity features. - **Ransomware**: This has become a significant concern, with attackers demanding payments in cryptocurrencies. 3. **Context and Misconceptions**: - **Perception vs. Reality**: The perception that a large portion of crypto transactions are criminal might stem from early associations of Bitcoin with darknet markets like Silk Road. However, as the ecosystem has matured, legitimate uses have vastly outpaced illicit ones. - **Improving Transparency and Compliance**: Cryptocurrency exchanges and wallet providers are increasingly implementing KYC (Know Your Customer) and AML (Anti-Money Laundering) procedures, improving transparency and making it harder for criminals to use crypto for illicit transactions. 4. **Comparative Analysis**: - **Cash Transactions**: It's worth noting that illicit activities are not unique to cryptocurrencies; traditional fiat currencies are also used for criminal purposes, often at a larger scale relative to the size of the economy. ### Conclusion The claim that a quarter to a third of all crypto transactions are criminal seems to be an overestimate based on the available data from blockchain analysis firms and regulatory reports. While it's critical to acknowledge and address the use of cryptocurrencies in illegal activities, the vast majority of cryptocurrency transactions are for legitimate purposes. Efforts from within the crypto industry to increase regulatory compliance have also helped reduce the proportion of illicit transactions over time.

Hello Kartik! It seems like you don't know much about Bitcoin and you are explaining the inadequacies of Bitcoin which have been debunked repeatedly. Clearly, bitcoin is not an inflation hedge asset since it is following Nasdaq X3 leveraged. It's more a tech investment. On the electricity consumption, THIS IS why Bitcoin is so powerful. For the past 15 years, proof of work has been proved very secured. And you have many companies in Texas using Bitcoin mining to reduce their waste too. On the risk of Bitcoin, of course, you have many risks, like all other asset classes. On the long run, you could have talked about a possible hack of blocks by a quantum computer. Or maybe the fact that SHA-256 is based on a mathematical conjecture and maybe is false : so it could be reversed and Bitcoin's blockchain hacked... Nothing is forever, even Bitcoin I guess.

You're just surfing onto the hype yourself, and you've been telling people to not buy bitcoin for years, litteraly preventing them from making the biggest gains any asset has ever made lol, in other words you suck at recognizing patterns and shifting paradigms get mogged

Lol Kartik you don't know shit about Bitcoin and its no surprise you teach at stanford on a topic you know technically know nothing about. Nothing more to be said there. You're a useful midcurve that the banker cartel uses as a mouthpiece to prolong their demise.

The income inequality isn't the problem. When you use social welfare payments and a complicated tax code. To punish people for earning more money. That is the problem

A couple of years ago, you mentioned that you were personally involved in an emerging computer technology that would displace digital processing and extend "Moore's Law." Not to pry into your affairs, but if something such as that got released shortly, then would the GDP per capita trend become more vertical?

What are fucking hack. You're doing your audience a disservice. I'm not sure if you're talking complete rubbish due to malice or idiocy. You should stfu and think about what's going on

Kartik, what are your thoughts on AI and smartphones, such as apple intelligence?