I do not think it is going to happen. The countries that will be affected will not allow it to start another huge financial crisis like the one that happened in 2008. Deutsche bank will be bailed out for sure now that they know that if they want to bail out a bank, they better make sure they print more than enough fiat to do so. And they will have no problem with that as long as the end justifies the means.

If they allow it to collapse then what good will that be to everyone involved?

I agree, that is why in my past posts I believe it would be better for Bitcoin to go down to the lower $500s so that there will be new speculators will be encouraged to start buying again instead of waiting. New speculators in the economy means there is new money coming in. This price today is a sellers market and most traders are not willing to buy at these prices.

I have seen some answers but they do not satisfy what I am trying to find out. So here is a follow up question relating to the topic. If banks already have their implementations of blockchains including their features, would there be a need for the use of alternative cryptocurrencies like LTC?

BTC already seems to have a growing user base so maybe it will survive, but what of the other cryptocurrencies?

As a community member who has been here longer, what is your opinion on what will happen if a fork like Bitcoin Unlimited will gain enough support. Will it split the Bitcoin network in two just like what happened to Ethereum? The supporters of the fork all think it will be ok just like what Vitalik thought with the Ethereum hard fork.

Also if the hard fork does split the network in two, who is liable to be "hanged" by the community? Will Roger Ver step forward and own up to the mistake?

You are wrong on this one. Cryptocurrencies will make it harder for anyone to steal and get anybody's Bitcoins if they know how to secure them correctly. Why don't you try stealing the Bitcoins at Satoshi's wallet or ask your government to do so.


What is your point here? We already are dependent on computers even if Bitcoin was not invented. Bitcoin is not even widely used yet for that to matter if you think deeply about the situation.

It is also impossible for gold or fiat to become worthless just because Bitcoin will rise to your impossible figure of $1m. They could possibly become worthless but not because of Bitcoin.

The core developers should find a way to improve the blockchain pruning methods and also work together with 3rd parties to have a good implementation of off chain transactions. Off chain transactions will hit 2 birds with one stone. It will help scale Bitcoin and it will handle the load away from bloating the blockchain.

There are a lot of people in this forum who deny this as a problem or a potentially serious problem in the future. Yes storage is becoming cheaper and cheaper every year but does that really solve the problem of the bloating blockchain? There is also a concern that bandwidth is a bigger problem than storage.

There should be solutions made in Bitcoin itself and I am confident that the core developers will find a good way.

That is a poor excuse and I hope the Bitcoin core developers are not thinking the same way as you are. Just because hard drives are getting cheap, do you think that the core developers should not find ways to improve pruning and other measures to prevent the blockchain's bloating size? Whatever other people say about offline transactions I still believe it should be one feature that should be explored and tested as soon as possible.

Also please remember that bandwidth is the bigger issue here than storage.

This is a good point. If the intention is to trade in and out of altcoins or in and out of BTC/USD to accumulate more Bitcoins then it will not matter at what price you plan to buy. Maybe by doing so you are actually doing both Bitcoin as longterm investment and also as a medium of trading altcoins. But if you intend to hold only for the very longterm then it would not be a bad idea to look for a bargain. The reason for this is you get to buy more Bitcoins for the same amount of fiat money.

As long as you do not generate any new Bitcoin addresses then your current back ups will be fine. Anything you have spent and anything you have received will be automatically updated by the network once you fire up Mutltibit even if you used an old back up. But keep in mind that any addresses that you generate after that said back up will not be included so it is wise to back up everytime you generate a new address.

A good habit to have is to back up all your Multibit data everytime you use it just to be sure whether you generated a new address or not. It would also be good to encrypt all your data using veracrypt and cryptomator. You can also zip the Multibit folder first and put a password in the zipfile. That is already 3 layers of protection + your wallet password.

It will be a pain to do all this at first but as your Bitcoin amount grows larger and larger you will find many ways just to feel safe and secure with your money. 

Ethereum and Monero are superior? The last time I looked both cryptocurrencies also have problems with scalability especially with Ethereum's case. Ethereum dapps will be subject to some sort of runtime errors because the sheer number of transactions will not be handled by the network. There is also the bloating of the blockchain. Ethereum is already 18GB large in just a couple of years being online. It has not even reached high transactions per block yet. With Monero how can they surpass Bitcoin? They are lacking a GUI and infrastructure needed to gain more users. The acceptance in the DNM is overrated and it is hype.

Just to be clear with you, I do not deny the possibility of Bitcoin reaching $1000 or more. But in my opinion it will take more time and it will be gradual if there is no manipulation going on. In fact I mentioned something in another thread that it would make sense for Bitcoin to reduce its volatility in % terms by reaching and stabilize at $10,000 per coin.

I was reading about the Hyper Ledger project, a project that is overseen by the Linux Foundation and is supported by the likes of IBM, Intel and other known banks all over the world. Then it occured to me that it could lessen the chances of Bitcoin's adoption to the mainstream because the banks' clients which is comprised of the people who are productive to society would be diverted to their private blockchains instead of using Bitcoin directly.

Bitcoin is lucky to have first mover advantage so it just happened to become somehow competitive and gained a following because of it. Now here is my question from all this. Is the ticket to gain massive adoption for Bitcoin or some other cryptocurrency project possible only thru the banks? But how is that possible when they do not want anything to do with them and are already supporting the development of private blockchains?

I believe Bitcoin will live on because it has a solid foundation but the same cannot be said with altcoins.

Here's a funny thought. Will you all be happy if the Federal Reserve declares that Bitcoin might be a good investment and announce that they are buying and will be holding for the long term?

What would it mean for Bitcoin and the Bitcoin economy if "money can literally be printed" into the Bitcoin market now?

I personally like backing up my whole Multibit folder offline by using a USB drive. The data folder is located somewhere in the application data folder in Windows and in your home folder in Linux.  Note that the app data folder might be hidden in Windows so just unhide hidden folders for it to be easier to access.

If you want to be safe, it would be better to cut that folder out of your computer and place it in a couple of USB's. You can also encrypt that folder by using open source encryption software that can be found online.  I hope that helps.

Well there was some news that the "explosion" to $1000+ was caused by a bot that was artificially pushing the price up and above $1000+. I believe it will take the same kind of manipulation for Bitcoin to go above that price in a span of maybe 1 or 2 months. So everytime I see and read threads like these I just roll my eyes and consider it as hype or the poster only trying to hype. There is no crime in that but it is over done to the point that it does not make the people hopeful anymore. I prefer to hear the truth.

I am in it for the long haul because I support the movement and I also believe that cryptocurrencies are the future. Do not get me wrong but the moment we all see that Bitcoin is on its way down I will not hesitate to protect myself and hold some other coin as my "main coin". So I am not all too much hyped on Bitcoin as you are.

If you think Bitcoin will go to $3000 - $5000 then that will be a very long wait. Bitcoin reached and went over $1000 only because of a bot artificially pushing the price up on a constant basis. So in knowing that, there will still be a lot of time to get in and we can still wait for a better price to get into. Getting in a better price would also mean that I could get more Bitcoins for the amount I am willing to spend than blindly getting in at any price like most of the people recommend and do here.

I just found this one today.

http://www.dwavesys.com/press-releases/d-wave-systems-previews-2000-qubit-quantum-system

So that is not real then or are we missing something? Or maybe the possibility of quantum computers are closer than we thought? The company can be charged with something if they are doing some kind of false advertising for their products, right?

I disagree with this kind of thinking. It is not only trying to create hype but it is also ignoring one key rule in trading. Always look for a bargain and always protect your money. The present price should not be thought of as "cheap" or "expensive" now but rather start thinking of how you can get Bitcoin at a much better price than what is offered now. It would be an irresponsible thing to say "buy now! buy now!" to the people who do not know any better, only for them to find out that it might be a wrong move. Also do we even know if it will pass $1000 in the near future?

There is already news out in reddit that the Litecoin developers headed none other than Charlie Lee will start R&D on the cryptocurrency's upgrades. Among them were confidential transactions, dynamic block sizes and a quantum resistant cryptography method. Maybe the Bitcoin core developers might learn a thing or two from the LTC developers and integrate their research and progress into Bitcoin's protocol.