x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 1 比特币是个庞氏骗局吗？
【原作：某美国公知】
【翻译：xinchong】
我在此做一个预测：比特币将作为历史上最壮观的私人庞氏骗局载入史册。与美国历史
上最大的诈骗犯伯纳德·麦道夫相比，是大巫见小巫。 （但是它跟美国社会保险金相
比却是小巫见大巫。）
为了解释我的立场，我必须做两件事。首先，我将描述每一种庞氏骗局的经济学。其次
，我将解释奥地利学派经济学关于钱的来源的理论。我的分析将控制在经济层次上，但
据我所知，这还应该是一个法律制度层次方面上的一个问题。
庞氏骗局的经济学
首先，一位从来没人听说过的无名人士公布他已经发现了一种制造金钱的方法。就比特
币来说，这个公告可以从文字上的意义去理解。这个发明家，从字面上去理解，他说他
创造的是钱，或者是未来的钱。他说他是无中生有，用数字化的数字制造出这笔钱来。
大家可以想象一下，他是未来的能印钱的“美联储”。
其次，他还声称，某一特定市场提供了尚未开发的套利机会。有些东西卖价太低了。如
果您现在购买他的程序，运行该计划的他将能够代表你把它以高价卖出。所以，你要抓
住这个的套利机会。
今天的高速股票市场交易，普通的交易市场里的套利机会只能持续几毫秒。商品期货市
场的套利机会则持续很短的时间。特别是在绝大部分利用杠杆的所有期货市场和复杂的
货币期货市场里，这么短暂的一段时间，只有高速的计算机程序才可以利用它们的套利
机会。
兜售庞氏骗局的人，靠的是拿走大部分从你那里骗来的钱。换句话说，这个人他不会用
你的钱去投资。但比特币的情况却很独特：从一开始，你的钱是就被抽走了。这人拥有
大部分的原始的数字化的数字。然后，通过讲述他的故事，这人创造了需求：大家对所
有数字的需求。他所拥有的比特币份额的美元价值随着其它数字的买卖不断升值。
这一骗钱手段在几十年前已经被经济学鼻祖亚当·斯密描述过。你可以在他的书“超级
金钱”中找到它。这是就像有几个人创建了一个新的金融公司，保留了很大份额的股份
，然后再卖出其余的股票给公众。从这个意义上说，比特币不是一个庞氏骗局。这是一
个简单的“超级金钱”方案。
但是，如果我们来看看比特币存在的理由，它庞氏骗局的特性就暴露了。比特币买卖的
基础是，他们将成为一种替代货币。换句话说，这将是未来的钱。
比特币将永远不会成为未来的钱。这是我的主要论点。
**奥地利学派理论对货币的起源**
钱的最好的定义最早在1892年由奥地利经济学家卡尔·门格尔提出。他说，钱是最适合
市场销售的商品。这个定义被他的弟子路德维希·冯·米塞斯继承，并在他出版于1912
年的书“货币和信贷理论”中，提出了论述。
在这本书中，米塞斯认为，就像门格尔在他面前说过，货币产生于市场交易。钱在市场
交易的出现之前不是货币，钱因为有了市场交易之后才有了这个功能。一些很宝贵的东
西，比如说黄金或白银，在用于商品交换的用途上，变得更有价值。人们从物物交换转
变到货币经济。这促进了社会分工。随着越来越多的人用货币的商品属性来促进商品交
流，社会分工分得更细了。因此，人们的生产率提高了。他们可以进行专业化。专业化
生产的人令平均产量增加了，因此人均收入也增加了。
在这种情况下，某些具有独立价值的东西，便成为交易者关注的重点；而使用这种东西
，他们发现他们做买卖的能力大大增加了。货币就是从市场交换慢慢发展而来的。钱开
始时不是作为这种用途而存在的，经济中无数次交易的结果令它变得广泛使用而成为货
币。
这就是货币的重要事实：钱是市场过程的产物。它产生于一个无计划的，分散的过程。
这个需要时间，需要很长的时间。它的使用方式传播得很慢，直到新接触到这个概念的
人们发现它是一种生产的工具，因为它为所有商品和服务增加了市场规模。没有人会这
样说， “我想我会创造一种新货币。 ”
注意啦：任何时候您看到创建一种新货币的建议，赶紧把你的旧货币拿好。
货币的重要好处是在于它可以预测的购买力。商品性货币是不容易生产的。开采成本是
很高的。它也是慢慢地被大量的参与者所采用。这些参与者使用这种货币作为交换手段
。为什么呢？因为它昨天是有价值的。因此，他们希望它明天也是有价值的。金钱具有
价值的连续性。这不是内在的价值。这是历史的价值。所以，一个人可以通过出售商品
或服务来购买货币，也可以将这个钱存起来，并可以在不同的位置，或在不同的时间内
重新输入市场，并具有这个信心：他大概能用这些钱买一个类似数量的产品和服务。
钱的积累不在于本身。钱的积累是为了购买将来的商品和服务。它之所以在方便市场交
流时有作用，正是因为它具不随着时间推移而变化的，稳定的市场价值。正是金钱的市
场汇率和它价值的可预测性令它成为货币。
**比特币不是货币**
现在，让我们来看看比特币。 一年里，一个比特币的市场价值已经从约2美元升至1000
多美元。可以讲这不是货币。此种商品没有被收购为货币，成为服务于商品交换的钱，
因为它的价值的不可预测性令其成为它的缺陷。
不可否认，那些谁在早期得到了这个庞氏骗局比特币的人都发财了。他们可能会继续发
财一段时间。随着越来越多的人听到这个投资，特别是听到其作为货币的未来的潜力，
更多的人会去买它。迟到的投资者买它不是因为知道它具有未来货币的潜力，他们买它
就像以前那些购买外国邮票的查尔斯-庞氏计划的后期投资者一样，以为有套利的潜在
机会。他们之所以去购买比特币，因为我们处在一个庞氏骗局的狂热之中。他们会继续
购买，因为他们以为这一次是不同上一次的。
这种数字化的钱是不会被用来促进商品交流的。不会有人会抛弃一年内从$2升至1000多
美元的东西来买比萨饼的。人们希望守着它，拒绝出售，在希望它会升到2000元。这就
是是经典的庞氏骗局心理的标志。人们不会去买一种投资，因为该投资提供了又一种投
资。换句话说，因为它是一个资本资产。他们买它，只为它的价格在上升。他们预计这
升值将继续下去。
奥地利学派的货币理论是：人们购买货币因为它的价格没有在下降。但同时它的价格也
没有上升很多。它的价值是可以预期的。为什么呢？因为它被大量的人在一个巨大的地
理区域作为储备而持有。通过传统，通过经验，它成为货币，并通过无数次的自愿的商
品交流的检验。它作为促进商品交换的手段，本身已在市场上被证明，并由此作为一种
长期的保值手段。但这并不是比特币的特征。人们买它作为货币，他们买它，因为他们
是处在一个狂热之中，他们是在赌博，一场买家人数将继续上升，直到永远的赌博。
下面是一个经济事实：傻瓜的数量是有限的。它们是一种稀缺的经济资源。由于比特币
的价格上涨，更多的傻瓜会被诱入市场。但是，这是一个有限的市场。
换句话说，比特币不可能履行其本来的目的：成为一个不受【政府】管制的货币单位。
比特币不是一种替代货币。他们是你在狂热之中买入的东西。你会在某些时候卖出去，
为了拿回你的钱。你正在考虑购买比特币，不是因为比特币将作为交换手段，就像我在
上面说的，而是因为你想要得到比你为它们付出很多更多的钱的回报。换句话说，比特
币不是货币，美元是货币。比特币从来都不可能对美元的统治地位发起挑战。 | a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | | x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 3 比特币是不可能变成货币的。
虽然政府不能控制比特币的transfer和使用,但政府能够控制法律，人民，和银行。
也就是说，只要美国（或任何）政府禁止所有银行对比特币和现金的转换，比特币的价
值马上变成0 | a****l
发帖数: 8211 | 4 Bit coin attempts to challenge the authority of government. Just this one
single reason dictates that it will fail for sure.
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 比特币是个庞氏骗局吗？
: 【原作：某美国公知】
: 【翻译：xinchong】
: 我在此做一个预测：比特币将作为历史上最壮观的私人庞氏骗局载入史册。与美国历史
: 上最大的诈骗犯伯纳德·麦道夫相比，是大巫见小巫。 （但是它跟美国社会保险金相
: 比却是小巫见大巫。）
: 为了解释我的立场，我必须做两件事。首先，我将描述每一种庞氏骗局的经济学。其次
: ，我将解释奥地利学派经济学关于钱的来源的理论。我的分析将控制在经济层次上，但
: 据我所知，这还应该是一个法律制度层次方面上的一个问题。
: 庞氏骗局的经济学
| a*****y
发帖数: 33185 | | i*a
发帖数: 132 | 6 政府能控制法律、人民、和银行是真。不过现在兑换比特币和实体货币的不是银行，而
是那几个比特币的交易平台。甚至还有像craigslist一样的论坛供大家私下兑换。
在这个兑换过程当中，比特币是作为一种商品存在。政府要禁止比特币和实体货币的兑
换是有一定难度的。除非政府说比特币像毒品一样属于禁品，否则这种禁令有违市场经
济的原则。
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 比特币是不可能变成货币的。
: 虽然政府不能控制比特币的transfer和使用,但政府能够控制法律，人民，和银行。
: 也就是说，只要美国（或任何）政府禁止所有银行对比特币和现金的转换，比特币的价
: 值马上变成0
| x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 7 特币的交易平台是如何将其转换成现金的？难道不需要通过银行吗？
【在 i*a 的大作中提到】
: 政府能控制法律、人民、和银行是真。不过现在兑换比特币和实体货币的不是银行，而
: 是那几个比特币的交易平台。甚至还有像craigslist一样的论坛供大家私下兑换。
: 在这个兑换过程当中，比特币是作为一种商品存在。政府要禁止比特币和实体货币的兑
: 换是有一定难度的。除非政府说比特币像毒品一样属于禁品，否则这种禁令有违市场经
: 济的原则。
| r******n
发帖数: 4522 | 8 干嘛非要现金，直接换毒品，换军火不行吗？tg不是当年还拿烟土当流通硬货吗？
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 特币的交易平台是如何将其转换成现金的？难道不需要通过银行吗？
| a*********0
发帖数: 2727 | | c*****g
发帖数: 21627 | 10 对于毛轮翻译的建议
If you buy into the program now => 如果你现在就对这个项目买账
而不是"您现在购买他的程序"
This strategy was described a generation ago by George Goodman, who wrote
under the pseudonym of Adam Smith
明明是一个冒充大师Adam Smith的叫Goodman的疣太
你却翻译成：“这一骗钱手段在几十年前已经被经济学鼻祖亚当·斯密描述过”
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 比特币是个庞氏骗局吗？
: 【原作：某美国公知】
: 【翻译：xinchong】
: 我在此做一个预测：比特币将作为历史上最壮观的私人庞氏骗局载入史册。与美国历史
: 上最大的诈骗犯伯纳德·麦道夫相比，是大巫见小巫。 （但是它跟美国社会保险金相
: 比却是小巫见大巫。）
: 为了解释我的立场，我必须做两件事。首先，我将描述每一种庞氏骗局的经济学。其次
: ，我将解释奥地利学派经济学关于钱的来源的理论。我的分析将控制在经济层次上，但
: 据我所知，这还应该是一个法律制度层次方面上的一个问题。
: 庞氏骗局的经济学
| | | c*****g
发帖数: 21627 | 11 翻译出来的只是一个摘要
全文见：
http://www.garynorth.com/public/11828.cfm
Bitcoins: The Second Biggest Ponzi Scheme in History
Gary North - November 29, 2013
I hereby make a prediction: Bitcoins will go down in history as the most
spectacular private Ponzi scheme in history. It will dwarf anything dreamed
of by Bernard Madoff. (It will never rival Social Security, however.)
To explain my position, I must do two things. First, I will describe the
economics of every Ponzi scheme. Second, I will explain the Austrian school
of economics' theory of the origin of money. My analysis is strictly
economic. As far as I know, it is a legal scheme -- and should be.
PONZI ECONOMICS
First, someone who no one has ever heard of before announces that he has
discovered a way to make money. In the case of Bitcoins, the claim is
literal. The creator literally made what he says is money, or will be money.
He made this money out of digits. He made it out of nothing. Think "Federal
Reserve wanna-be."
Second, the individual claims that a particular market provides unexploited
arbitrage opportunities. Something is selling too low. If you buy into the
program now, the person running the scheme will be able to sell it high on
your behalf. So, you will take advantage of the arbitrage opportunity.
Today, with high-speed trading, arbitrage opportunities last only for a few
milliseconds seconds in widely traded markets. Arbitrage opportunities in
the commodity futures market last for very short periods. But in the most
leveraged and sophisticated of all the futures markets, namely, the currency
futures markets, arbitrage opportunities last for so brief a period of time
that only high-speed computer programs can take advantage of them.
The individual who sells the Ponzi scheme makes money by siphoning off a
large share of the money coming in. In other words, he does not make the
investment. But Bitcoins are unique. The money was siphoned off from the
beginning. Somebody owned a good percentage of the original digits. Then, by
telling his story, this individual created demand for all of the digits.
The dollar-value of his share of the Bitcoins appreciates with the other
digits.
This strategy was described a generation ago by George Goodman, who wrote
under the pseudonym of Adam Smith. You can find it in his book, Supermoney.
This is done with financial corporations when individuals create a new
business, retain a large share of the shares, and then sell the stock to the
public. In this sense, Bitcoins is not a Ponzi scheme. It is simply a
supermoney scheme.
The Ponzi aspect of it comes when we look at the justification for Bitcoins.
They were sold on the basis that Bitcoins will be an alternative currency.
In other words, this will be the money of the future.
The coins will never be the money of the future. This is my main argument.
THE AUSTRIAN SCHOOL'S THEORY OF MONEY'S ORIGINS
The best definition of money was first offered by Austrian economist Carl
Menger in 1892. He said that money is the most marketable commodity. This
definition was picked up by his disciple, Ludwig von Mises, who presented it
in his book, The Theory of Money and Credit, published in 1912.
In that book, Mises argued, as Menger had before him, that money arises out
of market transactions. That which did not function as money before, now
functions as money. Something that was valuable for its own sake, most
likely gold or silver, becomes valuable for another purpose, namely, the
facilitation of exchange. People move from barter to a monetary economy.
This increases the division of labor. As more and more people use the money
commodity in order to facilitate exchanges, the division of labor extends,
and as a result, people's productivity increases. They can specialize. This
specialization produces increased output per person, and therefore increased
income per person.
In this scenario, something that had independent value becomes the focus of
traders, who find that their ability to buy and sell increases as a result
of the use of this commodity. Money develops out of market exchanges. Money
was not used for its own sake initially, but it becomes widely used as money
as a result of innumerable transactions within the economy. (I discuss this
in my chapter in Theory of Money and Fiduciary Media, published by the
Mises Institute in 2012.)
Here is the central fact of money. Money is the product of the market
process. It arises out of an unplanned, decentralized process. This takes
time. It takes a lot of time. It spreads slowly, as new people discover it
as a tool of production, because it increases the size of the market for all
goods and services. No one says, "I think I'll invent a new form of money."
Note: any time you see a proposal of a new form of money, hold on to your
old form of money.
The central benefit of money is its predictable purchasing power. A monetary
commodity is not easy to produce. The cost of mining is high. Money is
slowly adopted by a large number of participants. These participants use
money as a means of exchange. Why? Because it was valuable the day before.
They therefore expect it to be valuable the next day. Money has continuity
of value. This is not intrinsic value. It is historic value. So, a person
can buy money by the sale of goods or services, set this money aside, and re
-enter the markets in a different location or in a different time, in the
confidence that he will probably be able to buy a similar quantity of goods
and services.
Money is not accumulated for its own sake. It is accumulated to buy future
goods and services. It is useful in the facilitation of exchange precisely
because its market value varies little over time. It is the predictability
of money's market exchange rate that makes it money.
BITCOINS ARE NOT MONEY
Now let us look at bitcoins. The market value of one bitcoin has gone from
about $2 to $1,000 in a year. This is not money. This commodity is not being
bought for its services as money. It is unpredictable to a fault.
Admittedly, those who got in early on this Ponzi scheme are doing very well.
They will probably continue to do well for a time. As more people hear
about this investment, which is justified in terms of its future potential
as money, more people will buy it. Late-comers are not buying it because
they understand its potential as future money, any more than the late
investors in Charles Ponzi's scheme thought they were buying into the
arbitrage potential of foreign postage stamps. They are buying Bitcoins
because we are in the midst of a Ponzi scheme mania. They will continue to
buy because they think this time it's different.
This digital so-called money will not be used to facilitate exchange. Nobody
is going to be getting rid of an asset that has moved from $2 to $1,000 in
one year in order to buy pizzas. People want to hang onto it, refusing to
sell, in the hopes that it will go to $2,000. This is the classic mark of
Ponzi scheme psychology. People do not buy the investment for the benefits
that the investment provides as an investment, in other words, because it is
a capital asset. They buy it only because it has gone up in price. They
expect this to continue.
Here is the Austrian school's theory of money. People buy money because it
has not fallen in price. But it has also not gone up in price much, either.
It is predictable. Why? Because it is held in reserve by a large number of
people over a large geographical area. It has become money through tradition
, through experience, and through endless numbers of exchanges on a
voluntary basis. It has proven itself in the marketplace as a means of
facilitating exchange, and thereby as a means of preserving value over time.
This is not the characteristic feature of a Bitcoin. People are not buying
it to serve as money; they are buying it because they are in the midst of a
mania, and they are gambling that the number of buyers will continue upward
forever.
Here is an economic fact: the number of fools is limited. They are a scarce
economic resource. As the price of bitcoins rises, more fools will be lured
into the market. But this is a finite market.
In other words, bitcoins cannot possibly fulfill their supposed purpose: to
serve as an unregulated currency unit. Bitcoins are not an alternative
currency. They are something you buy in the midst of a mania, and you will
sell at some point in order to get back your money. You are thinking of
buying Bitcoins, not because Bitcoins will serve as a means of exchange, as
originally argued, but because you want to get back lots more money than you
paid for them. In other words, Bitcoins are not money; dollars are money.
There has been no challenge from Bitcoins to the reign of the dollar.
JUST SAY NO
When you see an offer of an investment which inherently cannot possibly
exist on its own merit, and yet lots of people are coming into the market to
buy the item, you know, without any question, that this is a Ponzi scheme.
In other words, people are buying into the program, not because of an
arbitrage opportunity, and not because of a capital breakthrough in terms of
technology, but because somebody else bought it cheaper yesterday. You buy
it today, not because you think it is going to offer a stable value, but
because you think you're going to make a bundle of money when more people
come into the market. Again, this is the classic mark of a Ponzi scheme.
In order for Bitcoins to become an alternative currency, there will have to
be millions of users of the currency. There will have to be tens of millions
of users of the currency. They will have to develop in a market on their
merit as money, not as an investment of dollars in order to get more dollars
back. It would have to develop through exchange, not bought as an
investment. In other words, the free market will have to adopt Bitcoins as a
means of increasing the division of labor.
Bitcoins are not increasing the division of labor. They are bought on the
basis that somebody can get into a game of musical chairs. Instead of
running out of chairs, leaving one person the great winter, the promoters
started with a given number of chairs, and then they hoped that lots would
come and bid on the chairs. "If we issue it, they will come." This took
place. The promoters creators are now very rich, as measured in dollars.
The fact of the matter is this: Bitcoins will not increase the division of
labor by serving as an alternative currency. Inherently, Bitcoins have made
their mark, not on the basis of their stable value in exchange, that is,
their value in increasing the division of labor in alternative markets that
do not use the dollar. On the contrary, Bitcoins are being purchased for one
reason only: to get in on the deal. Buy low; sell high. Buy with what?
Dollars. Sell for what? Dollars.
The mania has destroyed Bitcoins' use as money. Bitcoins are too volatile in
price ever to serve as a currency.
Which is money: dollars or Bitcoins? The answer is obvious: dollars.
This is a Ponzi scheme.
WHAT GOES UP COMES DOWN
This will lead to the ruination of more people than any private Ponzi scheme
in history. There will be the poor schnooks to get in at the end, paying
perhaps thousands of dollars per Bitcoin. Then the market will unravel. It
will unravel for the same reason that all Ponzi schemes have unraveled: not
enough new buyers. When the new buyers do not show up in great numbers, the
holders will start to dump them. What went up in price, as measured in
dollars, the real money, will come down in price.
This mania is going to be the stuff of best-selling books. This is going to
be this stuff of Ph.D. dissertations in economics and psychology. This is
going to be the equivalent of Mackay's book, Extraordinary Popular Delusions
and the Madness of Crowds.
The interesting thing is the mania started among the most technologically
sophisticated people on earth: computer techies. The techies who got in
early are going to be fabulously wealthy . . . if they sell. But the poor
schnooks who come in at the and are going to lose money. Collectively, this
will be the greatest single scheme for lots of people losing money that we
have ever seen. This Ponzi scheme is not illegal . . . yet. It will spread.
It has gone viral.
Any time you buy an investment, you had better have an exit strategy. There
is no exit strategy for Bitcoins.
You must get out at the top, or you lose your shirt.
CONCLUSION
Anytime that anybody tries to sell you an investment, you have to look at it
on this basis: "What are the future benefits that this investment will give
final consumers?" In other words, how does it serve the final consumer? If
it does not serve the final consumer, then it is a Ponzi scheme.
Bitcoins cannot serve the consumer. There is nothing to consume. The only
way that Bitcoins can work to the advantage of the consumer is that they
provides the consumer with increased opportunities, based on Bitcoins'
function as money. But the fundamental characteristic of money is its
relatively stable purchasing power.
Bitcoins will never achieve this. It is a mania going up. It will be a mania
coming down. It will not increase the division of labor, because people
will recognize it as having been a Ponzi scheme, and they will not again buy
it. They will not use it in exchange. Companies will not sell goods and
services based on Bitcoins. Bitcoins have to have stable purchasing power if
they are to serve as money, and they will never, ever achieve stable
purchasing power.
Whenever somebody tries to sell you an investment that is based on the
economic analysis of a market -- an analysis that cannot possibly be true --
do not buy the investment. This is a simple rule. I adhere to this rule.
There has to be an economic justification for a capital investment, and
there is no economic justification of buying Bitcoins as an alternative
currency. That was how Bitcoins were initially sold, and it was impossible
as an economic concept from the beginning. The Austrian theory of money
shows why.
I do not invest in capital that has no economic justification other than the
greater fool theory. There are too few fools to keep the scheme going.
Bitcoins are not illegal. They should not be made illegal. They should
merely be avoided.
© 2013 GaryNorth.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without
permission prohibited. | v*******r
发帖数: 210 | | x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 13 1）我以为淘比特币的就是一个计算机程序，对不对？所以就这样译了。
2）今天谁认识George Goodman啊？亚当-斯密却是大名鼎鼎。反正是同一个人，所以就
这样译了。（pseudonym 是笔名的意思，不是冒充大师的意思）
水平有限，欢迎批评指点。
【在 c*****g 的大作中提到】
: 对于毛轮翻译的建议
: If you buy into the program now => 如果你现在就对这个项目买账
: 而不是"您现在购买他的程序"
: This strategy was described a generation ago by George Goodman, who wrote
: under the pseudonym of Adam Smith
: 明明是一个冒充大师Adam Smith的叫Goodman的疣太
: 你却翻译成：“这一骗钱手段在几十年前已经被经济学鼻祖亚当·斯密描述过”
| c*****g
发帖数: 21627 | 14 毛轮，你的水平实在太差了，本来我只想从翻译角度给你一点建议
没想到你的回复再一次显示你的水平之差
无知小将，你的知识面实在太狭窄了
1. 淘比特币目前有N个程序，实际上任何人只要有能力都可以自己写一个程序
比特币本身是一个协议，在这个协议基础上可以有客户端程序和挖矿程序还有交易所程序
结合上下文，作者明显是指整个bitcoin这么一个大的生态环境，
而不仅仅局限于细节的挖矿程序
另外program我想哪怕英文再烂的人只要报过霉国的学校都知道是什么含义
比如Master's program是指一个学校的硕士招生项目，这和计算机软件程序一点都不沾边
2，Adam Smith是一个几百年前的英国大师，其的国富论对于资本主义
就相当于马克思的《资本论》对于共产主义
几十年前，George Goodman和报社串通，为了让自己的文章/报纸好卖，用了Adam
Smith
这个笔名。
其性质，就相当于本版的liyuanchao这个ID，你不会愚蠢到认为他就真是李源潮吧
比如他天天在版上说“彰显吾辈出国优越性”，
你不会说“李源潮曾经说过：‘彰显吾辈出国优越性’”
毛轮的实事就是的精神跑哪儿去了？
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 1）我以为淘比特币的就是一个计算机程序，对不对？所以就这样译了。
: 2）今天谁认识George Goodman啊？亚当-斯密却是大名鼎鼎。反正是同一个人，所以就
: 这样译了。（pseudonym 是笔名的意思，不是冒充大师的意思）
: 水平有限，欢迎批评指点。
| x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 15 我再仔细看看原文，你说得都是对的!
1）是我对淘比特币的过程不熟悉所导致；
2）是我对历史不熟悉所导致；
致敬！
程序
沾边
【在 c*****g 的大作中提到】
: 毛轮，你的水平实在太差了，本来我只想从翻译角度给你一点建议
: 没想到你的回复再一次显示你的水平之差
: 无知小将，你的知识面实在太狭窄了
: 1. 淘比特币目前有N个程序，实际上任何人只要有能力都可以自己写一个程序
: 比特币本身是一个协议，在这个协议基础上可以有客户端程序和挖矿程序还有交易所程序
: 结合上下文，作者明显是指整个bitcoin这么一个大的生态环境，
: 而不仅仅局限于细节的挖矿程序
: 另外program我想哪怕英文再烂的人只要报过霉国的学校都知道是什么含义
: 比如Master's program是指一个学校的硕士招生项目，这和计算机软件程序一点都不沾边
: 2，Adam Smith是一个几百年前的英国大师，其的国富论对于资本主义
| c*****g
发帖数: 21627 | 16 你的态度值得肯定！
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 我再仔细看看原文，你说得都是对的!
: 1）是我对淘比特币的过程不熟悉所导致；
: 2）是我对历史不熟悉所导致；
: 致敬！
:
: 程序
: 沾边
| x******g
发帖数: 33885 | 17 毛主席教导的。实事求是，有错就改。
【在 c*****g 的大作中提到】
: 你的态度值得肯定！
| i*a
发帖数: 132 | 18 我都已经说了，有像craigslist一样的平台供大家交易比特币。你在craigslist上付现
金买东西，和银行有什么直接关系吗？买家自己的钱想怎么花，和银行没什么关系。除
非政府说比特币是毒品，那样才能禁止类似的交易。
【在 x******g 的大作中提到】
: 特币的交易平台是如何将其转换成现金的？难道不需要通过银行吗？
|
|
