Bitcoin Forum

Please could someone detail a plausible chain of events, other than an altcoin, preventing bitcoin from reaching dat moon?

I think US declaring bitcoin as illegal followed by a huge dump of Mtgox stolen bitcoins followed by panic selling could do that.

Those who can hang on through the shake-out will be quite happy.

it can only go the moon if it gets an 1.extremely high transactional use and/or 2. gets a high stored value (like gold)

re 1 the first world countries (US for example) can already do all the transactions they need  without bitcoin. It may well save fees but most people use credit cards for access to the credit so it will never really compete with visa etc. In the third world where bitcoin is touted as the saviour from western union type companies who charge higher handling fees most of that "fee' goes to pay for the final handover of the money eg having an office in the place. It provides the 'security" people need that they are to get their money easily, quickly and in their local currency. so I do not see western union under major threat. if they do see a threat to some market share they will react in some way that lessens bitcoins effect (and therefore uptake)


re 2 it could get some sort of stored value through the use of the blockchain but I see other ideas coming along (eg etherum) that may be better here- at the very least they will eat into bitcoins potential.
also the US dollar I understand moves about 10% per annum. Bitcoin rises and falls fast and in big chunks. Makes it great for speculators but terrifies the people who store things under the mattress as well as institutional investors. Until that stops there is not much chance people will value it as a store of wealth and the longer that goes on as other posters has said bitcoin may just become irrelevant except to the very few who love the concept of it for itself

Your 2 scenarios are reasons why bitcoin will succeed in my opinion.
1.  Transaction fees are minimal with bitcoin.  Credit cards cost retailers money and I'm taxed €50 a year for my credit card!  Western Union need to make money.  Cut them out of the equation and the only loser is Western Union which is already happening.
2.  Think of it like gold only transportable so easily.  Gold has value so why not bitcoin.  Point made.

Well, the community is still quite small. I can easily imagine that people just loose interest,
one after the other. And if the community shrinks quickly, many people will sell because they
are afraid the experiment is over. At that point, it can not be stopped..

Pure speculation, though..

I am not so sure.

1. I do not use a credit card as i do not want to pay the fees nor do I need the credit facility but I use a debit card that comes free from my bank. That allows me to do electronic transactions etc ie much of what bitcoin "offers'. So you can do the same and save €50 a year but presumably you want/need their funds (credit) part as well.
re cutting western union out of the equation - there will always be a place for a western union type operation. Bitcoin will eat into their market but only at the edges. I also think by the time bitcoin becomes strong/large enough to compete with the likes of western unions it will carry some non mining costs that people will want payment for. ie if you want exchanges to be trustworthy they will have to have some sort of regulation and that brings with it compliance costs etc.

2. that something is easily transportable is a reason for adopting it and using it but does not make it inherently valuable. 

A lot of people have company credit cards which are paid off automatically and still require the €50 tax.  Notwithstanding that, debit cards also incur that €50 annual tax.  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
But you have got to agree that cutting the middleman i.e. Western Union helps everybody except Western Union.  Why will there always be a place for Western Union?  Why would bitcoin have any 'non mining cost'  when it's peer to peer (no middleman taking his cut)?
Gold has as no inherent value either.  Only because it's rare.  Bitcoin is also rare but far easier to transport so therefore in my opinion a better store of wealth.
It's the internet baby!  Prepare for BIG change.

It's really too simple. Nothing happens then people lose interest.

...apart from growth of an altcoin instead (couldnt fit this in the title). But even that seems increasingly unlikely these days, more and more we hear of new coins being built on top of the bitcoin blockchain instead of their own thing.

Please could someone detail a plausible chain of events, other than an altcoin, preventing bitcoin from reaching dat moon?

re western union.
have you ever seen western union working in third world countries?. there actually provide something - they are not just middlemen taking a free margin. peer to peer is a catchy concept but it works fine if you have bitcoin and the other person wants bitcoin. once one or other turns it into fiat for example fees come into play. also bitcoin has a long way to go to get reputable exchanges etc. its time enough for the wider market place to adapt to its presence and lessen its impact.
re store of wealth  - the price of bitcoin is about US$250. Can you tell me what share of that you believe to be is its store of wealth? I think its nil or close to it and the whole $250 is its speculated transactional value which I see declining to double figures

It's really too simple. Nothing happens then people lose interest.

I know they are not just middlemen but they are middlemen who are unnecessary in the age of bitcoin.  Even if you want fiat to bitcoin and back to fiat transactions which would require a bitcoin middleman they are still way cheaper than WU.  But a point will come where people will be happy to hold on to bitcoin rather than change it back to fiat and no middleman is necessary.

re store of wealth  - the price of gold is about US$1100. Can you tell me what share of that you believe to be is its store of wealth? I think its nil or close to it and the whole $1100 is its speculated transactional value which I see declining to triple figures

unless you are a miner to get bitcoin you need to buy it - that means a middleman.
say one year ago you thought i will buy 1 bitcoin and hold it to send to someone who wants bitcoin at a later date . You would have paid us$448 for that 1 bitcoin.
today your friend would like to buy something that people who pay with fiat are having to spend us $448. You send your friend your one bitcoin in a fast seamless transaction. But the key question is  - will the seller of the goods give it to him for 1 bitcoin? the answer is no as the seller of the goods would only have (if it took the one bitcoin) the buying power of us$250.

gold has dropped 7% over the year but has risen 6% over the last 5 years.

I can live with a store of value that has this sort of movement -  ie its purchasing power is not significantly different in the short term (1-3 years).

i see bitcoin at least in the short term as being the reverse  - it hit $1200 as a result of willybot and is still going down as more and more that chased it up have to take the hit ie cannot afford to hold . I am just not confident that i should buy it and hold it at 1200 or 448 or 250 or sub 100 where it will be in 12 months. 

happy to buy it and send it to someone who sells if for fiat within 24 hours. but that does not help the stored value of bitcoin. as i see it the only holders of bitcoin are the giant bitcoin owners who got them mining for a few cents each.

^...and, after you stop fantasizing, think about reality :-\

http://s15.postimg.org/eyb4ps77f/Capture.jpg

a newbie trying to counter me with a short-term graph.....

Zoom out dude!

Seems on the money to me.  A year and a half, ~1/3 of the time since the 10,000 BTC pizza.  N00b. :-\

A greater number of people who are involved now can't find a use for it in their lives, or don't want to use it. Pretty simple really.

i think no one who bought btc at some points ever doubts how to use it

The only thing you can do on this forum is trolling, welcome on my ignore list.

...apart from growth of an altcoin instead (couldnt fit this in the title). But even that seems increasingly unlikely these days, more and more we hear of new coins being built on top of the bitcoin blockchain instead of their own thing.

Please could someone detail a plausible chain of events, other than an altcoin, preventing bitcoin from reaching dat moon?

...apart from growth of an altcoin instead (couldnt fit this in the title). But even that seems increasingly unlikely these days, more and more we hear of new coins being built on top of the bitcoin blockchain instead of their own thing.

Please could someone detail a plausible chain of events, other than an altcoin, preventing bitcoin from reaching dat moon?

    Executive Order — "Blocking the Property of Certain Persons Engaging in Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities"

    EXECUTIVE ORDER

    – – – – – – –

    BLOCKING THE PROPERTY OF CERTAIN PERSONS ENGAGING IN SIGNIFICANT MALICIOUS CYBER-ENABLED ACTIVITIES

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

    I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, find that the increasing prevalence and severity of malicious cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States. I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with this threat.

    Accordingly, I hereby order:

    Section 1. (a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:

    (i) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, cyber-enabled activities originating from, or directed by persons located, in whole or in substantial part, outside the United States that are reasonably likely to result in, or have materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States and that have the purpose or effect of:

    (A) harming, or otherwise significantly compromising the provision of services by, a computer or network of computers that support one or more entities in a critical infrastructure sector;

    (B) significantly compromising the provision of services by one or more entities in a critical infrastructure sector;

    (C) causing a significant disruption to the availability of a computer or network of computers; or

    (D) causing a significant misappropriation of funds or economic resources, trade secrets, personal identifiers, or financial information for commercial or competitive advantage or private financial gain; or

    (ii) any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State:

    (A) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, the receipt or use for commercial or competitive advantage or private financial gain, or by a commercial entity, outside the United States of trade secrets misappropriated through cyber-enabled means, knowing they have been misappropriated, where the misappropriation of such trade secrets is reasonably likely to result in, or has materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States;

    (B) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, any activity described in subsections (a)(i) or (a)(ii)(A) of this section or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order;

    (C) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

    (D) to have attempted to engage in any of the activities described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii)(A)-(C) of this section.

    (b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the effective date of this order.

    Sec. 2. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

    Sec. 3. The prohibitions in section 1 of this order include but are not limited to:

    (a) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; and

    (b) the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

    Sec. 4. I hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in section 1(a) of this order would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of such persons. Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).

    Sec. 5. (a) Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

    (b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

    Sec. 6. For the purposes of this order:

    (a) the term "person" means an individual or entity;

    (b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;

    (c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States;

    (d) the term "critical infrastructure sector" means any of the designated critical infrastructure sectors identified in Presidential Policy Directive 21; and

    (e) the term "misappropriation" includes any taking or obtaining by improper means, without permission or consent, or under false pretenses.

    Sec. 7. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render those measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1 of this order.

    Sec. 8. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order.

    Sec. 9. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit the recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

    Sec. 10. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

    BARACK OBAMA

    THE WHITE HOUSE,
    April 1, 2015.

^^ April's fools day. Check the date.

Or we could just wait till fiat goes down and it will be the same :P and I cant imagine a plausible chain of events preventing fiat prom collapsing  ;D