Translation: I'm making a random unsubstantiated guess hoping that some inbred cretin will tip me.

However you do not post any of your "calculations" which makes this thread worth nothing. Basically you are just guessing.

Possible, but extremely unlikely, IMO.

Proof-of-stake voting will almost certainly not ask every person to weigh in on every decision (that would be horribly inefficient). Instead, we'll elect someone to be in charge of a block of money for a block of time. At the end of that time, we'll elect someone else (or the same person, if we like how they ran things) for the next block of money and block of time. The size of the blocks of money and blocks of time will also be decided by proof-of-stake voting.

For instance, we might vote to give Ron authorization to spend 5% of the project funds over the following three months. If Ron does a terrible job, we might elect somebody else after that. If we like how Ron spent the money, we might elect him again.

I noticed people are too nervous to buy in, volatile markets can cause widespread fear which the smart money use to capitalize on. Look at it this way, if Bitcoin can achieve $1250 in such an EARLY stage you really think this is the end ? This is just the start people and the fact Bitcoin is valued so highly is because there is really nothing left in this world to invest in, every other assets class is either too confusing, too overvalued or too manipulated. $10,000 is easily achievable in the next 2 years at this rate.

Whatever price you buy in at right now you are guaranteed a minimum of 100% Return within 1 year (v conservative estimate), what other investment provides you the same returns ? None !

Bitcoin is still EARLY stages, Think about it guys just look at other assets/stocks like gold, oil, real estate, agriculture, Google, apple etc etc people screamed bubble from day 1 of their booms but it took at least 6 - 12 years for those bubbles to burst ! Bitcoin barely started.

Take a deep breath, study the fundamentals you will realize how genius crypto currencies are and how lucky you are to be in so early and Buy in !

My own view is that it will reach $5k within 12 months.

Its just frustrating having no money to throw at it, although, I know if I was borrowing money, I would have wasted it on various alt coins! ;-)

What exactly started the recent run-up in BTC prices from about the $100-$200 price range all the way into the $1000 price range?

So a guy who holds one bitcoin should have a vote as strong as JRs?  'One man, one vote' - is that what you advocate?  JR and others holding significant amounts don't want morons voting to do dumb things because it greatly effects their value - while minimally effecting the stupid voter.  

Just like voting stock shares, those most effected need a greater say.  

This is getting stupid.  How did guys like bitexch get involved in the first place?  

I think you are missing the point. The only reason you would ever exercise all 28% of your voting rights is if you wanted to do something the majority of the community was against. Twice as many people could be in favor of a policy decision as against it, and you could single-handedly turn the vote against the policy.

I don't think you're quite considering the seriousness of the situation.

EDIT: If your voting rights aren't limited (either to a definite, *much smaller* percentage or to none at all), then there won't be anything to say to critics who complain about Mastercoin's centralization - they will be right!


Have you considered looking outside of the project for full-time devs? There are people who are currently not involved in Mastercoin who would be well suited to it. I am surprised that it needs repeating, but a few of our current main devs have repeatedly said that they do not want to work on Mastercoin full-time, and I don't see why we should keep trying to convince them.We have a great idea and lots of funding, I don't see any reason for begging people to develop the project.

You'll feel a lot worse in 5 years when they're 40k a coin.... why didn't you buy when they were only 800

Seriously, nobody on the street knows what a bitcoin is.  It's still SUPER EARLY.

Can't help but feel this way

In an expanding economy the same amount of bitcoins would be continually distributed on an ever increasing quantity of goods, which would mean sustained deflation. It is not that difficult to understand really...

There is also an interesting Editorial discussing Bitcoin:

Banking on Bitcoin - Virtual currencies could rival banknotes, but not bankers

If a small city state had adopted Bitcoin as its national currency, it would now be in the grip of deflation as foreign speculators siphoned away its supply of the virtual currency. Money would be scarce, and prices would fall dramatically. Authorities might try to lift prices but they would lack one of their most powerful tools. Central bankers can create money at will, by printing notes or creating deposits. Bitcoin is based on digital tokens, which are generated at an unalterable rate by cryptographic algorithms running on the computers of volunteers, making it impossible to match supply to demand. This is an improbable fantasy. But Bitcoin’s undulating value makes it unsuitable for all but the most limited purposes. Speculators are the keenest acquirers of the currency. For some, it is a way of stashing wealth where authorities cannot find it. Others want to make purchases without leaving an obvious trace. Silk Road, the online contraband emporium that was closed by authorities last month, was one of the few businesses to insist on payment in Bitcoin. But many prices were pegged to the dollar; the virtual money served merely as a way of disguising the flow of hard currency.

Still, if Bitcoin’s applications are limited, its emergence as a workable means of exchange nonetheless reveals something surprising. Friedrich Hayek argued that the government should cede its monopoly over the money supply, leaving consumers free to choose between competing currencies. It turns out that they were already freer than they thought. Authorities have so far tolerated the virtual currency. Yet the product of the state-owned incumbent has proved more attractive than Hayek expected.

The experiment is an indication of how monetary systems might change in future. Many believed it impossible to create a form of electronic cash that did not rely on a bank to keep tabs on account balances. Bitcoin proved them wrong. But many are uneasy about reversing the technological accident that has made financial transactions more traceable in the era of electronic banking.

Some see tamper-proof virtual currencies as preferable to physical ones that central bankers can easily debase. The island of Alderney is in talks with Royal Mint to make physical coins backed by Bitcoins in its electronic vault. But enthusiasts should be careful what they wish for. An unstable price level is dangerous. Removing the steering-wheel is the wrong way to prevent central bankers from driving the economy off the road.

Looks like someone is freaking out that Risto might talk the price down.

Had to start a new topic as he deleted my posts in his topic. This is just a reminder to those who might have forgotten or those who are new to bitcoin.

Rpietila is shouting doom and gloom all over the forum, but until the beginning of the year he was predicting a bitcoin valuation of several hundred thousand USD. That was whilst he was in a manic phase, during which his behavior on these forums, as well as in real life caused much sensation and is well documented for those interested in using the search function.

He was subsequently involuntarily hospitalized in a psychiatric facility, diagnosed with Bipolar Affective Disorder, with multiple delusions of grandeur. He now seems to be in a depressive phase of his illness and is spreading doom and gloom on the speculation forums. Either that, or he has sold just before we hit 1000 and is now regretting his mistake.

Either way, thread carefully with him

That was a quote from trace mayer from (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZwmgeeFB-E&t=7m15s)

Is this right? Can anyone point out a flaw in this reasoning? That 1% figure makes 2.8 million dollars per bitcoin sound oddly conservative and saying 2.8 million dollars per btc is conservative makes me feel like i sound like I'm out of my mind. What do you guys think?

BTW I just wanted to let you guys know there are a lot of unanswered questions about Mastercoin on Quora.

If you have a bit of time, you can jump in and help answer them, and even get some bounty as part of the Documentation Contest.