Bitcoin's biggest problem is that people still trust the current financial, currency and banking system.
Yes, similar to how reason's biggest problem is that people still choose to believe things without compelling evidence. Both problems are temporary side-effects of the infant state of our species. It's the classic "you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" problem.
|
|
|
What's Bitcoin's biggest problem? Universal trust in national fiat scrip. However this problem is fading by the day, along with the legitimacy of the state. What single thing would make Bitcoin more mainstream? Time. Is it a reputational issue? No. Is the tech still too complex for the "average" person? Yes, but it's a patience issue above all else.
|
|
|
Two years? That is many moons from now.
|
|
|
From what I understand, if you only have FINRA approval, there are a lot of types of investors that can't use the exchange. With SEC approval Hedge Funds and such can play. SEC is the real deal. Yep. This is a step in that direction though. This, then Bitlicense/defined reg, then Gemini and similar exchanges, then ETF. Boom Moon. Fixed that for you.
|
|
|
Do we at least have hoverboards in every major city? Because frankly I don't want to live in any future without hoverboards.
|
|
|
From what I understand BIT got FINRA approval, while Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust filed for SEC approval.
But I've no idea what's the difference in practice and how's it possible to be FINRA approved without SEC approval (or the other way around?). From what I understand, if you only have FINRA approval, there are a lot of types of investors that can't use the exchange. With SEC approval Hedge Funds and such can play. SEC is the real deal.
|
|
|
What do you think on "how this will actually affect the price at any cost"? No matter what happens, I think you should panic.
|
|
|
I don't expect we'll see bitcoin's golden moment until another two or three years pass. We are in early days here, folks. It strikes me as highly probable that some horrible fiat catastrophe will bring on bitcoin's golden moment.
|
|
|
I know this scenario is a stretch - but what happens in the future if all of a sudden a serious percentage of Bitcoins are unspendable (and all at once)? The remaining coins gain value proportionately as they have suddenly become more scarce. By 2020 the companies established around bitcoin will be both wealthy and secure.
|
|
|
I am so confused.
What is better? Which one do you guys recommend more? That depends, how do you feel about being poor?
|
|
|
A stable price of $5000 would be great
Don't count on Bitcoin having price stability at $5,000, or any other amount measured in fiat.
|
|
|
Fair price for 1 satoshi in fiat scrip is this: It is unethical to endorse violence-backed fiat by accepting it in trade for private keys. In rational self-interest terms, it is also quite stupid to accept the value of national fiat for everyone except the people printing it and their close friends. The miracle of fiat is that the governments of these nations have convinced millions of people that they are their close friends. The miracle is that people believe this. The miracle of bitcoin is that it represents mathematically provable truth based money. This antidote is being injected into a society of deceit.
|
|
|
If bitcoin is so shitty like how the media says it, then why are so much people hacking bitcoin exchanges and stealing it? There's a reason the Enron doc was called "the smartest men in the room".
|
|
|
It comes down to how well people know Bitcoin. It comes down to how many days have elapsed since the genesis block. Finance getting attacked by computer science, g-fucking-g the game was over before it began.
|
|
|
I heard about someone in italy lost over $50.000 of BTC because he was robbed on a street. The "buyer" attacked him with 2 other guys and he had a choice.. Lose 50k or die.
So he lost the 50k, and then 2 months later they were caught and he got his money back. Lets hope that people can stay safe with their BTC in the future.
Transparency is an underappreciated feature of the blockchain. Conservatives, libertarians, and anarchists all tend to fetishize anonymity, but none of them seem to have considered what financial transparency could mean when applied to the elite, instead of only applied to the peasants as it is today. They have discounted a paradigm-shifting feature of a post-fiat reality. Money being created by democracy, rather than by the state. A public ledger with transparency, instead of a private ledger with none.
|
|
|
Bitcoin is plenty corrupt and plenty of Pump n dumps...
What's the matter capitalist, the market leaving you butthurt? You don't like the game because other people have more pieces than you do? Awwww, poor little guy, he still thinks he can win the game! I'm afraid there's no room for you at the top of the pyramid, my child. You will have to remain poor forever. Harsh reality: If you're not already among the global wealthiest ten percent, odds are high you'll be getting poorer in the coming decades. Automation is a bitch of a thing. This is the beginning of the end of the nation state and capitalism as we know it. Divesting everything from fiat is your only hope to survive the coming transition.
|
|
|
Yes, I already agreed to this. Bitcoin only solves the BGP if you assume the network isn't compromised. Strictly speaking, Bitcoin cannot solve the Byzantine Generals' Problem, but neither can anything else with 100% confidence. This is why it is a "dilemma" or "problem" and why researchers study probabilistic solutions to solving the Byzantine fault tolerance problems.
Strictly speaking, on paper the dilemma may remain forever "unsolvable". However, each and every day of bitcoin's existence, the problem of trust is solved in practice. And it's getting bigger and more valuable.
|
|
|
The "there can only be one" camp of Bitcoiners do not understand that altcoins supporters don't necessarily think that any altcoin will overtake Bitcoin in value. I can't speak for everyone, but I believe that Bitcoin will always be the "one" cryptocurrency, the crypto reserve currency.* But there will always be room for a few more cryptocurrencies that are adopted widely just like Bitcoin. These cryptocurrencies will have independent economic models and not pegged to Bitcoin and will have a free-floating market price. All true, except you conveniently didn't mention the free-floating market price of all these reinvented wheels will be free-falling down to zero as bitcoin matures. Sperm is a fun analogy. There are currently lots of swimmers furiously trying to get to the egg of mass adoption. Once the strongest fights its way in the rest will fall away. Well said!
|
|
|
There have been other digital "currencies" before Bitcoin, so Satoshi essentially reinvented the wheel as well. In fact, every invention that came after the discovery of fire and the making of the wheel, is what we deem "reinventing the wheel", as we base and grow inventions based upon what others invented in the past. Flatly incorrect. Satoshi solved the byzantine general's problem, a solution which had eluded computer scientists for decades.
|
|
|
The "there can only be one" camp of Bitcoiners do not understand that altcoins supporters don't necessarily think that any altcoin will overtake Bitcoin in value. I can't speak for everyone, but I believe that Bitcoin will always be the "one" cryptocurrency, the crypto reserve currency.* But there will always be room for a few more cryptocurrencies that are adopted widely just like Bitcoin. These cryptocurrencies will have independent economic models and not pegged to Bitcoin and will have a free-floating market price. All true, except you conveniently didn't mention that the "free-floating market price" of all these reinvented wheels will be free-falling down to zero as bitcoin matures.
|
|
|
|