Maybe we should send Roger Ver to Hong-Kong to check them out and tell us everything is ok. LOL As much as MPOE-PR (Mircea Popescu) was hated she/he was usually right when he called bullshit (and that's why people hated him). He had Bitfinex pegged in 2013: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=230182.0I really miss MPOE-PR. He's the only person that I've ever known that could call you a nigger and make you happy about it. |
|
|
|
So i was skeptical back in 2013 when btc made their initial splash into the mainstream radar.
You mean you heard about it in 2013. Bitcoins initial big splash happened years before that when two articles, one in Galker and one in slashdot, let everyone know they could buy drugs at Silk Road anonymously online with Bitcoin.
I recently became interested in cryptocurrencies because i was finally able to wrap my head the ideas behind blockchain and now firmly believe it is the future.
I went out and bought some BTC, ETH and LTC
Why? Out of all the investments you could have made you chose crypto? Was it fast bucks, drug money or ideology?
Obviously Japan recognizing BtC as a form of currency is huge but i am wondering which of these cryptocurrencies will be around in 10-20 years time.
Does it matter? You'll most likely have three kids, a mortgage and a wife spending all your cash as fast as she can by then. Worry about today, that's more than most people can handle.
Most holders of these cryptos are in it for purely speculative reasons and in turn, creating large bubbles.
All "holders" are speculating but day traders/forex traders are creating the bubbles.
The only way thes bubbles will resolve is from 3 things that need to happen:
Wrong, these cryptos are playing in the world economy. It's almost infinitely complex. There are a mountain of reasons why bubbles happen. Here's one you might not know about: an exchange operator called Mark Karpeles used two trading bots and created a bubble because he was covering up his incompetence.
-wider usage . Btc needs to be able to be used to be able to purchase anything that traditional fiat is able to. This is obviously a no brainer. Btc needs to be spread out in the hands of more people
Would help but can't guarantee no bubble.
- price needs to stabilize - the fluctuation in price is insane and needs to stabilize, in order for this to happen btc needs further distribution. Hoarders (chinese farmers and early miners) are a negative, see below.
Bubbles are created by traders. I already covered that. Without trading watch cryptos shrink to nothing in short order.
- fiat currency needs to disappear- this is obviously a radical thought but fiat cannot be an option. The reason is, guys like the mysterious satoshi nakamoto, chinese btc farmers, the vinklevoss twins etc or anyone holding a significant amount of btc can literally tank the btc ecosystem by trading out a large sum of btc to lets say us dollars.
Not in your lifetime.
This would create a huge price instability, loss of public trust and then we circle back to square one.
Just wanted to share my thoughts.
I am in as a skeptical long term buyer but did want to address some possible pitfalls to btc
The items you mention aren't a downside or a pitfall. They are a normal aspect of commodity trading. Gold has been traded since forever and still has massive swings in price when trading is heavy. I don't mean this as a jab against you but If you're skeptical and unsure of your decision try something more stable and safe. Try a long term investment like government bonds. If you like the ideology behind Bitcoin stay and don't spend more money than you can afford to lose.
Not sure what you are gettin at, 2013 is when a great majority of people heard about bitcoin. Im not an idiot and understand it was around since 2009 but BTC did not enter the popular conversation till mainstream outlets wrote into it Also, i dont think you understand the fundamental concept of what a bubble is. Lots of speculation and not being used. Bitcoin and most other cryptos falls under this right now The great majority of people still don't know what Bitcoin is. Sure they may have heard about it but they don't know what it is. It really became something useful and exploded in use when the Slashdot and Galker articles were released. Silk Road put Bitcoin on the map. You didn't read everything I wrote. Bitcoin acts as both a currency and a commodity at the same time. You only like the currency part of that equation. Bubbles are normal for commodities and they mean Bitcoin is being used. To say bitcoins are being used for speculation and bitcoins are not being used in the same sentence is an oxymoron. |
|
|
|
So i was skeptical back in 2013 when btc made their initial splash into the mainstream radar.
You mean you heard about it in 2013. Bitcoins initial big splash happened years before that when two articles, one in Galker and one in slashdot, let everyone know they could buy drugs at Silk Road anonymously online with Bitcoin.
I recently became interested in cryptocurrencies because i was finally able to wrap my head the ideas behind blockchain and now firmly believe it is the future.
I went out and bought some BTC, ETH and LTC
Why? Out of all the investments you could have made you chose crypto? Was it fast bucks, drug money or ideology?
Obviously Japan recognizing BtC as a form of currency is huge but i am wondering which of these cryptocurrencies will be around in 10-20 years time.
Does it matter? You'll most likely have three kids, a mortgage and a wife spending all your cash as fast as she can by then. Worry about today, that's more than most people can handle.
Most holders of these cryptos are in it for purely speculative reasons and in turn, creating large bubbles.
All "holders" are speculating but day traders/forex traders are creating the bubbles.
The only way thes bubbles will resolve is from 3 things that need to happen:
Wrong, these cryptos are playing in the world economy. It's almost infinitely complex. There are a mountain of reasons why bubbles happen. Here's one you might not know about: an exchange operator called Mark Karpeles used two trading bots and created a bubble because he was covering up his incompetence.
-wider usage . Btc needs to be able to be used to be able to purchase anything that traditional fiat is able to. This is obviously a no brainer. Btc needs to be spread out in the hands of more people
Would help but can't guarantee no bubble.
- price needs to stabilize - the fluctuation in price is insane and needs to stabilize, in order for this to happen btc needs further distribution. Hoarders (chinese farmers and early miners) are a negative, see below.
Bubbles are created by traders. I already covered that. Without trading watch cryptos shrink to nothing in short order.
- fiat currency needs to disappear- this is obviously a radical thought but fiat cannot be an option. The reason is, guys like the mysterious satoshi nakamoto, chinese btc farmers, the vinklevoss twins etc or anyone holding a significant amount of btc can literally tank the btc ecosystem by trading out a large sum of btc to lets say us dollars.
Not in your lifetime.
This would create a huge price instability, loss of public trust and then we circle back to square one.
Just wanted to share my thoughts.
I am in as a skeptical long term buyer but did want to address some possible pitfalls to btc
The items you mention aren't a downside or a pitfall. They are a normal aspect of commodity trading. Gold has been traded since forever and still has massive swings in price when trading is heavy. I don't mean this as a jab against you but If you're skeptical and unsure of your decision try something more stable and safe. Try a long term investment like government bonds. If you like the ideology behind Bitcoin stay and don't spend more money than you can afford to lose.
|
|
|
|
|
Is it just me or does anyone else think Donald Trump is batshit crazy?
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, really? I have a wallet of coins I mined at Graets pool, Ozcoin in 2011 that has never been opened or moved. They have been in cold storage for six years. You gonna help me out and erase my abandoned btc for me? What an asshole!
|
|
|
|
|
I hope you realize this has nothing to do with bitcoin at all and will not benefit bitcoin whatsoever.
This is yet another example of a company proving they don't need bitcoin because they can just copy the technology. I would be concerned if I had a stake in Lightning Network. Eventually banks will just create their own LN based on a blockchain they control. No one needs to stake costly transactions on a blockchain that's maintained and developed by unpaid volunteers.
|
|
|
|
|
Look up Shemittah or shemittat kesafim. I think you'll find Jewish people have the discussion of money as an intrinsic part of their religion.
Israeli sites are not the biggest. Coincheck in Japan is currently the largest.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess I'd need to know how many customers 1% is and how much revenue they generated before judging if that's bad. Overstock might have had a large boost in revenue but only a few customers. Companies commonly have board meetings and discuss ways to increase their market share by only 1-2%. A 1% increase could be considered a success for some companies.
Visa, MasterCard, bank accounts and PayPal have 99% of the current market share for online purchases, Bitcoin has less than 1%. Why would an experienced businessman like Patrick Byrne expect that would change just because he starts accepting Bitcoin?
|
|
|
|
|
Of course not, you'd have to be crazy to use any method of payment that costs 10-20% extra when you can use a debit or credit card and only spend 2%. Understanding the problem is one thing but how do you solve it?
I exchange btc for cash occasionally and get raped on both ends of the transaction. I don't see any solution or I'd already be using it.
|
|
|
|
This is old news. Banks have been studying blockchain tech for years now. It is funny though. Bitcoin, the great libertarian big bank and fiat destroyer, is going to make big banks and fiat even stronger than they were before. Source: http://nypost.com/2016/08/24/big-banks-push-new-digital-currency-to-rival-bitcoin/UBS has developed a “Utility Settlement Coin” (USC), which is a digital cash equivalent of each of the major currencies backed by central banks, such as the dollar or euro, rather than a decentralized new digital currency such as bitcoin.
The USC would be convertible at parity with a bank deposit in the corresponding currency, making it fully backed by cash assets at a central bank. Spending a USC would be the same as spending the real currency it is paired with, UBS said.
Blockchain projects such as this have the potential to shake up the settlement system used by banks, under which transactions can take several days to finalize and which costs the financial industry $65 billion to $80 billion a year, according to an Oliver Wyman report last year. It's a libtards wet porno dream and then your mom walks into the room.  |
|
|
|
|
There's almost no one in the first three pages of this thread that still comes to this forum and the OP is a scammer that hacked an account that went active after 6 years. Hell, these people probably don't have anything to do with Bitcoin anymore. I think FreeMoney is in jail. Moonshadow is a scammer. Andresen isn't a dev now. hugolp is a scammer. Kiba hasn't been here since 2016. You may as well be answering the question of a dead man.
Yes, Bitcoin is money. There you have your answer. Start a new thread.
|
|
|
|
 =  This is what people want Bitcoin to become? Curious. |
|
|
|
Due to the nature of bitcoin it's kind of impossible to know how many people use it.
It does not really matter how many bitcoin users there are in the world, I think that due to the fact that bitcoin supply is limited all we need to know is how much bitcoin there is left to mine. At this point there are over 16+ million bitcoins circulating in the internet and the supply is limited to 21 million for 100 years and we already got more than half of it in less than 10 years, so imagine the more users who will come in how thing will change. The number of bitcoin users is always insignificant, what really matters is how many bitcoins you hold. Go for it right away ! You read the "mined to date" number of bitcoins without subtracting the non circulating bitcoins from that total. You do realize that Satoshi has over a million btc that never moved even once? Now you're at 15 million. Take the MtGox loss and the known burned coins and you're at 14 million. Take all the large long term investors that are holding coins out of circulation and it's at 13 million. I read a well written article that calculated the true number of bitcoins in circulation at between 11.2 and 12.5 million. It's very possible for all of the bitcoins to be mined into existence and only have half of the designed 21 million in the end. If you already mentioned burned coins. This is with the assumption nothing will change in the way bitcoin transactions are done. We have to problems. Coins will be lost, and this is nothing that can be done about. Lost drives, lost phones, forgotten place where you buried your cat bitcoin pkey Second is dust. Dust is created all the time. And with the current fee for a transactions it makes dust recovery nearly impossible. Now, if nothing will ever change, we could safely assume there will be far less coins in circulation 10 years from now on. You're right, but people never look at the real number of coins in circulation. They just spout nonsense like Bitcoin running the whole world, the number of users has to be a billion by now and everyone should buy coffee with bitcoin. What amazing stupidity. A little known fact is that Starbucks sells 60 million cups of coffee a week and that's just one coffee shop chain. Add all the other hundreds of coffee shop chains and individual shops worldwide and you're in the realm of billions of cups of coffee sold a week. Bitcoin couldn't even handle the coffee market if that was the only thing it did. No one ever logically thinks about Bitcoin and it's limitations. Pfft, 60 thousand unconfirmed transactions - try 60 million unconfirmed transactions. |
|
|
|
This forum is so entertaining.
Roger Ver - Bitcoin Jesus Angel Investor -> Roger Ver - hated dumbass
Gavin Andresen - Lead Dev Super Special Bitcoin Foundation Paid Coder God -> Gavin Andresen - hated dumbass
Mike Hearn - Google Engineer to Bitcoinj's Dev Daddy and Bitcoin Super Core Coder -> Mike Hearn - hated dumbass
Charlie Shrem - Bitcoin Entrepreneur and Super Promoter -> Charlie Shrem - Inmate
James McCarthy - GLBSE Operator, first international trip using only Bitcoin, forum moderator -> James McCarthy -> Illegal Exchange Operator, Thief, hated dumbass
Erik Voorhees - Super Bitcoin Promoter, Super Dice Blockchain Spammer, IPO God, BirdFeeder and Exchange Operator -> Illegal IPO Operator, Scammer, Thief
Peter Vessenes - Bitcoin Foundation Savior, Entrepreneur, MtGox Savior -> Peter Vessenes - Scammer, Thief, Liar, hated dumbass
Mark (MagicalTux) Karpeles - Main Exchange Operator, Revered Bitcoin God, Founding member of The Bitcoin Foundation -> Mark (MyButtholeHurts) Karpeles - Largest Thief in Bithistory, Scammer, Inmate, despised dumbass
And On and on and on and on and on
BTC is full of "gangs". it depends of their interests what people are "good" or not  It's not about gangs or being good. The characters from Bitcoin history I mention above are not at fault. They did nothing wrong. The people in this community are the problem. What I meant with the above is how the Bitcoin community has always praised people for their involvement and put them on a pedestal believing every word out of their mouths. They never simply respect their involvement, thank them, question every step they take and wait for results. In 2011-12 I used to watch people wet themselves every time Gavin made a new thread. They drooled over him like a teenaged girl at a pop concert. Same thing with McCarthy, Shrem, Ver, and Karpeles. Am I the only one here that realizes no one does anything without motivated self interest? This forum isn't discussing a non-profit charity, it's discussing a financial instrument designed to make people money. Greed and avarice are all that matters here and still people are put on a pedestal and given the power to screw everyone. Do think TradeFortress, Pirate@40 or DeathandTaxes would have been able to rip anyone off if everything they did was questioned and scrutinized from the beginning? You all give them the authority over your finances without questioning anything they do because somehow they end up as God-like creatures on this forum. So, you finally realize what Ver really was all along. Good for you. |
|
|
|
It should be pretty easy to prove you're Satoshi and Craig Wright couldn't prove he's Satoshi so that means he's not.
This is invalid logic. I am glad that I have never lived in the city where you worked as a cop (since it would be so easy to prove that I did not steal from the store, since I have not proven that I did not steal from the store, I must therefore be guilty of theft). Not true, all he would have to do is move some of Satoshi's coins and say how many he was moving and everyone would know he was Satoshi. If he can't do that he's not. You wouldn't have to worry. I wasn't a beat cop LEO. Sure, Wright could move known Satoshi coins and it would be known that he is satoshi, however the absence of this movement does not disprove that Wright is satoshi. The only way to truly disprove something is to prove a certain set of circumstances that would make it impossible for this something to be true. So, in order to prove that Wright is not Satoshi, someoen would need to show that it would be impossible that Wright is Satoshi (one example of this would be to show that Wright was in a coma when Satoshi was posting). I would say that the current evidence shows that it is highly unlikely that Wright is Satoshi. I just meant that Craig Wright had every reason to want to prove he was Satoshi. He even convinced the former lead dev that he was (which I never really understood, but whatever). If he was so highly motivated to prove himself and was the real deal it wouldn't have been very difficult to do. To me that proves he's not Satoshi. You're right though, your logic is sound, it really means it's highly unlikely that he could be Satoshi. He also settled with help from 'rich folks' that think he is satoshi ..with the australian tax authorities which is how this all became uncovered (i think) thus it is either a long con...or the btc commnity and press and such..just pissed off someone who could flust ..what is it 1/2 billion dollars as a sale to the btc universe..watch it burn and walk away still with millions of dollars.... sheesh..scared myself again It should be pretty easy to prove you're Satoshi and Craig Wright couldn't prove he's Satoshi so that means he's not.
This is invalid logic. I am glad that I have never lived in the city where you worked as a cop (since it would be so easy to prove that I did not steal from the store, since I have not proven that I did not steal from the store, I must therefore be guilty of theft). Not true, all he would have to do is move some of Satoshi's coins and say how many he was moving and everyone would know he was Satoshi. If he can't do that he's not. You wouldn't have to worry. I wasn't a beat cop LEO. Sure, Wright could move known Satoshi coins and it would be known that he is satoshi, however the absence of this movement does not disprove that Wright is satoshi. The only way to truly disprove something is to prove a certain set of circumstances that would make it impossible for this something to be true. So, in order to prove that Wright is not Satoshi, someoen would need to show that it would be impossible that Wright is Satoshi (one example of this would be to show that Wright was in a coma when Satoshi was posting). I would say that the current evidence shows that it is highly unlikely that Wright is Satoshi. Nobody is interested to prove that Wright is NOT Satoshi, but it was Craig who stated the he is. As long as he doesn't prove HIS statement, people will take him as he is: a liar. Yep I agree....just saying if he is satoshi...he strikes me as a guy who holds a grudge...thus jan 1st 2020....could be real frigging interesting (like a heart attack) kinda day imho  Don't have a heart attack. That's sure to ruin the rest of your day. You don't have anything to worry about for 2020. Craig Wright is a liar and a manipulator. There is no trust (that was a silly story anyway) and I can make you sleep easy tonight because I'm Satoshi. LOL Speaking of sleep, I've got to hit the rack before the drugs wear off. Goodnight all. |
|
|
|
It should be pretty easy to prove you're Satoshi and Craig Wright couldn't prove he's Satoshi so that means he's not.
This is invalid logic. I am glad that I have never lived in the city where you worked as a cop (since it would be so easy to prove that I did not steal from the store, since I have not proven that I did not steal from the store, I must therefore be guilty of theft). Not true, all he would have to do is move some of Satoshi's coins and say how many he was moving and everyone would know he was Satoshi. If he can't do that he's not. You wouldn't have to worry. I wasn't a beat cop LEO. Sure, Wright could move known Satoshi coins and it would be known that he is satoshi, however the absence of this movement does not disprove that Wright is satoshi. The only way to truly disprove something is to prove a certain set of circumstances that would make it impossible for this something to be true. So, in order to prove that Wright is not Satoshi, someoen would need to show that it would be impossible that Wright is Satoshi (one example of this would be to show that Wright was in a coma when Satoshi was posting). I would say that the current evidence shows that it is highly unlikely that Wright is Satoshi. I just meant that Craig Wright had every reason to want to prove he was Satoshi. He even convinced the former lead dev that he was (which I never really understood, but whatever). If he was so highly motivated to prove himself and was the real deal it wouldn't have been very difficult to do. To me that proves he's not Satoshi. You're right though, your logic is sound, it really means it's highly unlikely that he could be Satoshi. |
|
|
|
I guess I'm lost. Why would you want governments to support Bitcoin? I thought Bitcoin was the big anti-government anti-fiat rockstar that was going to help libertarians take over the world. What changed? Did I miss a meeting?
If bitcoin was accepted by the government then it will be a big step up for bitcoin because bitcoin will have a greater foundation which is the support of the government and the government will not allow bitcoin to die because they are already par of it. You didn't missed a meeting or any kind related to that. This is just a topic that discussing about that which is kinda good idea for bitcoin because we have a chance to get a support from one of the most powerful group in the world and that is the government. I see what you're saying. You want the government to give Bitcoin legitimacy. Thats kind of what's happening in Japan right now. Let's see how that works out. |
|
|
|
It should be pretty easy to prove you're Satoshi and Craig Wright couldn't prove he's Satoshi so that means he's not.
This is invalid logic. I am glad that I have never lived in the city where you worked as a cop (since it would be so easy to prove that I did not steal from the store, since I have not proven that I did not steal from the store, I must therefore be guilty of theft). Not true, all he would have to do is move some of Satoshi's coins and say how many he was moving and everyone would know he was Satoshi. If he can't do that he's not. You wouldn't have to worry. I wasn't a beat cop LEO. |
|
|
|
He did not have any statements (AFAIK) that were completely against everything that Bitcoin stands for. He is a genuine small blocker.
i literally lol'd at this. You have a paid signature now? You know that will just put you on the ignore list of every small minded fool that doesn't have common sense enough to simply scroll to the next post. There are idiots on this forum that have 4000-5000 people on ignore and now you're one of them. I disagree with much that you say but I don't want you just ignored. That removes the one post out of ten that you might say something helpful that the "ignore fools" might benefit from. I don't like paid sigs but I don't ignore for them. |
|
|
|
|
It should be pretty easy to prove you're Satoshi and Craig Wright couldn't prove he's Satoshi so that means he's not.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
