You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Ander comments on Bitcoin value and small probability / high impact arguments - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: vbuterin 31 March 2015 04:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (50)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Ander 31 March 2015 06:04:10PM 1 point [-]

Nitpick: BTC can be worth effectively less than $0 if you buy some then the price drops. But in a Pascalian scenario, that's a rounding error.

No, that would mean that you have an investment loss. Bitcoin is still worth $X each, whatever the new market price is. When you buy something and it goes down in value, its not worth less than $0, its just worth less than you paid for it.

Comment author: Slider 31 March 2015 11:35:57PM 0 points [-]

There are some events where bitcoins might form a negative value. For example if somebody stole a big amont of hardware illegimately and because of inability to identify to which bitcoins the illegit benefit where the whole pool of bitcoin might be fined with a ticket in conventional currency (that would be like the equivalent of saying that german franks are nazi money and anybody that is found in posession of it will be fined to have it confiscated). There is a high resistance to do that but since the analysis contains other portions with comparable uncertainty it starts to become relevant.