We can only conclude that today there is no willy bot (at least it's not pumping to that extent as it did last year) and that's good, no need for bubbles any more, bubbles only result in depressed investors and bad press. Let the crypto industry grow organically. More extended view on this. |
|
|
|
bitcoin failed to me means;
everyone stops using it
even if bitcoin is worth one cent i can still use it to pay for goods and services without having to deal with banks and all the fees that go with that
Yes, to me bitcoin failed means nobody will swap it for anything, not a pizza, and not even 0.00000000001 of a cent. If nobody wants it then it's failed as a store of value. That's a very loose definition though. Somebody will always want it, I guess, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's a good store of value, just ask Zimbabweans. |
|
|
|
Uhhh..... corporations can save millions of dollars by using bitcoin as a global money transmitter, that's one of the simplest and most obvious "unique" use cases for bitcoin
I've heard this general statement many times, but I don't think those who say it actually have a clue what they are talking about. Corporations don't pay those costs anyway, their customers pay the fees. Customers would have to purchase Bitcoins and pay a fee too, so what difference does it make? This saving of millions of dollars doesn't make sense, especially because Bitcoin is so volatile, you buy a few Bitcoins and you don't know whether their value would still be the same tomorrow or you will lose a few dollars before you can spend those Bitcoins. In short, this corporations will save Bitcoin bullshit is just another myth. One more myth: Bitcoin ETF from twin brothers will help drive the price. Crypto currencies are for the people and by the people, forget corporations. |
|
|
|
The tiny market cap and subsequent lack of liquidity limits its use to transfer mass amounts of value as a currency should. Volatility is just one of many of the results of a small market cap.
The sooner market cap grows by 10x and 100x, the better. Volatility is a result, not a cause. So please shut the fuck up about "stability" at $300-$400, because corporations will not even think about touching it at this point for remittances. If the price is this low, then bitcoin has FAILED
What makes you think corporations and banks will seriously think about touching Bitcoin (or cryptos in general) that they can't control? Oh wait, I get it, because pumpers told you so. Not gonna happen, Bitcoin and other cryptos are not for corporations, but for people. If people don't want Bitcoin or other cryptos, then cryptos are useless. If you wait for corporations to somehow convince people to buy Bitcoin and use it, well think again. Without unique use cases Bitcoin or any other crypto currency is doomed. Whatever solutions corporations can offer are centralized and they go against the principles of crypto currencies, that's why corporations are irrelevant. |
|
|
|
|
We're not talking about major flaws of encryption algos, etc. I have updated the OP to clarify that.
|
|
|
|
In a case (I don't think that it is possible, unless a major flaw destroys it) where Bitcoin would fall, it is most likely that all cryptos would be proclaimed as unsafe and fall. The whole system would collapse.
Why? That was my question. Suppose it's not an encryption/algorithm failure. |
|
|
|
Does litecoin count?
And either way... what should I do now? sell my BTC at a loss and diversify? I rather hold til half way through 2015
Don't ask me, I may be wrong on all counts. I am just saying Plan B would be nice ) |
|
|
|
|
Let's seriously discuss if this argument has any validity, because it sounds more like a biased idea with only a grain of truth to it. My personal opinion is if Bitcoin fails, this can have short-term effects for the adoption of cryptos, but the concept will survive. As well it's not quite clear what proponents of that idea mean exactly. What is failure? As long as someone mines and uses a crypto, it's not failed. Suppose, no encryption is broken, as then obviously I wouldn't ask this question.
Can we define failure of Bitcoin as "market cap below 50% of total market cap of the crypto industry"? It still wouldn't be a failure though, but we need a starting point of sorts to be able to tell that it's started to decline. Anyway, let me know what you think on these two points: what "Bitcoin failed" means for you and why if that technically happens would it be fatal for other cryptos if indeed you think it would be fatal for other cryptos?
Please refrain from pumping your favorite altcoin in this thread. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
...
interesting observation. however, if true, you should just reverse your actions.
... But the action taken will still be his action, and therefore wrong. An oracle who's always wrong is immensely useful to others [just do the opposite of what the oracle says], but never to self. Me, the oracle, is banking on a bubble/new ATH next year.... I plan to sell 10% of my holdings at $1000, 20% at $1300, and 70% at $2000+ depending on how fast we get there. So does that mean you should sell and we will NOT see a ATH next year? Fuck everyone and everything if it doesn't happen Sounds like you have no plan B. Fuck everyone is not plausible. Have you heard of diversifying your investments? |
|
|
|
Just wait until SPOW launches next year from the Uro team, then everybody can be happy  Everybody can never be happy and you can bet your last dollar on that ) |
|
|
|
|
OP, where is the option "we have already seen the ATH in Bitcoin"?
And if you say it's almost a certainty there'll be a new one, you should add an option for this tiny uncertainty, otherwise this is a biased poll.
|
|
|
|
There are two trains at the station right now and soon leaving:
One will get you to the place, where you can be free if you are willing to take care of yourself (PoW).
Another will take you to a more cosy place, where others take care about you (PoS).
It's not one or the other, they both exist and they are both valid, it's about which one would you ride.
what a bunch of bull, lol |
|
|
|
So have we worked out which is the purple plants yet? POW or POS?
To each their own (miners, users)  |
|
|
|
I looked in my "about tablet" section and it has various information such as model numbers and IDs but I do nor see "IMEI".
Is there another name for what you need or anywhere else I should look?
About tablet->Status->IMEI should be there if you scroll down the other options. |
|
|
|
Unless I am mis-understanding, anybody with at least 50% stake can do that.
With PoW mining, a 51% attacker can not force you to stop mining (short of seizing or bombing your equipment).
Please explain. Why do you have status "Sold 50% due to mining concentration." then below your username? |
|
|
|
If Bitcoin remains PoW, they can still buy that vast majority of coins, but everybody will have a trump card.
You know perfectly well, that the overwhelming majority of people will never mine any bitcoins and will never be able to compete with professional miners, just like majority of people don't compete with professional miners of natural resources. What matters for the majority of people is unique use cases. How the crypto currency came into existence doesn't matter for them if they have to buy it anyway, as long as it's a decentralized blockchain, distributed consensus and secure network - that's all that matters. The overwhelming majority might never feel the need to mine, but knowing that they can if they want to without permission, makes all the difference between PoW and PoS. There is no difference, who would prohibit them from forging in NXT PoS and get a profit from fees? Do they somehow get mining equipment for free to mine Bitcoin? I'd like to get me a few free ASICs then, oh and free electricity too |
|
|
|
SCammers advocate PoS because they cannot secure their blockchains.
With Proof of Work is is blatantly obvious they will never be able to secure their blockchain, so instead they obfuscate about Proof of Stake, pretending that somehow Proof of Stake will let their garbage scamcoin be secure even though it of course will not be secure.
It is all about the scam, selling people insecure garbage. The more people become aware that Proof of Stake is not secure, the more newfangled scammy "secure the blockchain" methods get made up, all in the attampt to sell yet another insecure pile of crap by obfuscating the fact it is insecure crap.
TL;DR it is easier to fool idiots into thinking your garbage-coin is secure if you use Proof of Stake so scammers prefer Proof of Stake when creating new scamcoins.
-MarkM-
Next time you should double the number of words 'scam', 'insecure', 'crap' and so on, it will sound even more dramatic |
|
|
|
If Bitcoin remains PoW, they can still buy that vast majority of coins, but everybody will have a trump card.
You know perfectly well, that the overwhelming majority of people will never mine any bitcoins and will never be able to compete with professional miners, just like majority of people don't compete with professional miners of natural resources. What matters for the majority of people is unique use cases. How the crypto currency came into existence doesn't matter for them if they have to buy it anyway, as long as it's a decentralized blockchain, distributed consensus and secure network - that's all that matters. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
