|
Would it take governments deciding to hold bitcoin in their reserves for bitcoin's market cap to reach these heights or not? Or is private capital sufficient to get bitcoin to the 100 billion, 500 billion or 2 trillion dollar market caps mentioned?
|
|
|
|
So let me see if I got this straight:
1) People think that if these coins sell for a discount to market price, then they'll immediately get dumped on the market.
2) But if these coins go for a premium over market price, then the buyer will hold them forever.
Completely binary outcome, eh?
(This short sighted thinking is why the majority of bitcoiners will never be wealthy)
Well no, but if someone did get them for under market value I would not be surprised to see them dump them on the market all at once in an attempt to induce selling and buy back again at a lower price once a sufficient amount of others have sold off their holdings. It's an aggressive move but there are definitely people in the btc market that attempt to manipulate the market in ways such as that. |
|
|
|
|
Honestly at this point if you're seriously concerned about the security of cryptocoin networks I would recommend buying some gold or maybe some promising stocks or something. Wait it out a bit to see how the developers approach the problem and see what solutions come up and are hopefully implemented.
The one thing that myself and everyone else can see is that buying Litecoin is probably the worst possible thing you could have done.
|
|
|
|
As we move into bitcoin economy , where there is merchant adoption universally and you are able to buy anything with bitcoin, there is no point an average guy would put his savings in a bank, He could save even a million dollars worth of money in a encrypted paper wallet.
Now banks will lose all the minimum balance that it recommends for having an account, Now banks will not have any money to loan out and hence the entire banking system collapses.
On the other side bitcoin 2.0 applications like counterparty, ethereum will enable crowdfunding and other financial derivatives and decentralized exchanges which will affect the investment banks. Because you don't rely on a central institution like banks to raise your capital.
What other ways could banks face disruption by bitcoin?
What if banks offered competitive interest rates on deposited fiat? in the U.S. you get like .1% per year on whatever you have in your bank account. Lets say you have 100,000 USD in the bank, that is 100 dollars you make by leaving your 100,000 in the bank... Or you could buy a stock and sell it for a .2% profit in less than a matter of a day and make 200 dollars - a 10 dollar trade fee? or you could do the same thing with converting BTC/USD and whatever else, my point is that you definitely do not make yourself better off by leaving your money sitting around. Smart money makes money. Yeah, the interest rates are bad now because there is very little pressure on banks to offer any. But with Bitcoin as a direct competitor as a store of value they might have to lower their margins and offer better incentives. A high interest rate, stability, and security might make a bank account a reasonable place to hold at least some of your wealth. |
|
|
|
With the way mining has evolved and continues to evolve outside of what Satoshi had envisioned
Actually it is evolving almost exactly the way Satoshi had envisioned. Have you read the things Satoshi has written? I feel that we should be fair in our description of what Bitcoin actually is. At least at the moment.
Decentralized is a fair description. I've read a fair amount of Satoshi's posts and I remember that he didn't envision mining pools. He did consider botnets however and he didn't see them as a threat. If decentralised is a fair description then surely 'trustless' can not be considered fair at this point. Since we're inherently trusting any mining pool with 33% or over not to attempt an attack. I'd argue that relying on a central point of trust makes the word 'decentralised' a poor descriptor. But it is a distributed network. And I also agree that it is unlikely that any changes will be made at the protocol level. However I continue to hope that enough people can work together to find solutions and that the dev team will actually implement those solutions. |
|
|
|
|
Any update on what happened?
I'm not sure what you can do but it's worrying that there is no obvious solution for you.
Hopefully things work out for you.
|
|
|
|
They quietly make big money, just like pokerstars who takes a rake off of each pot that is played in poker.
Want to elaborate a little on this? They generally take 5% of the pot up to $3 USD. They've dealt almost 100 billion hands so you can imagine how much money they've made. They actually just sold the company for 5 billion. |
|
|
|
|
Or at least different market caps for different levels of stability.
What is your estimate for +-1% variation and +-3% variation. Or what do you think is the most realistic +-% range that we'll see?
Gold is what, 9 trillion? And it's still often volatile. I'm guessing this is purely due to speculation.
|
|
|
|
Maybe Snowden will finally be able to travel. Perhaps we should set up a kickstarter to raise the $250k?
I don't think it's that simple. I'm pretty sure if he tries to go to most countries US agents will be waiting for him with handcuffs(and possibly worse). |
|
|
|
|
One thing that I don't understand is how people buying Cex.io shares effects Ghash's total hashing power.
The way I'm thinking of it is that this is hashing power that's already 'working' as it were and people are just buying the rights to mining that's already being done anyway. Is this not correct?
|
|
|
|
The new head of the bitcion FED - Sam Cole is everything that bitcoin is NOT about.
The bitcoin algorithm decentralized a currency but not the network nodes. Nodes are now
concentrated to who will invest the most Fiat. Nothing has really changed. A good idea
is to introduce a node entry difficulty. You can be as greedy as you like but the greedier
you are the harder it gets. Take out KNC and other bitcoin farms and get back to what
it's all about. Decentralization of all power bases into maximum sized fragments and diversify
all node ownership. Mr Nakomoto, you can do this.
What is node entry difficulty? I'm sorry to say but I highly doubt Satoshi is going to swoop in and save the day like some kind of super hero. |
|
|
|
|
How big is this bowl game relative to other college bowl games?
I don't know too much about college football. But I know the bigger bowl games like the BCS Championship, Rose Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Orange Bowl ect...
|
|
|
|
It looks like you go wrong when you describe a scenario where governments do away with cash, institute their own crypto, and make Bitcoin et al extinct. For the same reason that (some) people choose Bitcoin over Dollars right now, nobody would choose NewStrongCryptoDollars over Bitcoin, especially if there's an expectation for governments to abuse controlling it the way you describe. Check out Gresham's Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_lawAnother thing to think about is that Bitcoin as the core of a monetary system does not preclude the existence of "cash". Are you familiar with Casascius coins? Also, keep in mind that at the core of the US dollar system is just a bunch of computers run by the Federal Reserve keeping an account of who owns how many dollars. Certain dollar liability accounts, associated with the Treasury Department, are matched up with physical notes ("cash"). Aside from the decentralized aspect, that's exactly how it works/could work with Bitcoin, except that instead of the Treasury Department, it would just be a trusted institution producing and circulating the notes. I think you overestimate people. I can almost guarantee that people would use a government backed digital currency regardless of how rational it is. |
|
|
|
|
Supernode is a concept created by Risto Pietila.
I don't think he's currently operating as a supernode so I don't think a bank could be one either unless he decided to launch the network.
The main reason he didn't launch the supernode network if I recall correctly is that Localbitcoins beat him to the punch. So he put the concept on hold.
|
|
|
|
Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks this whole auction thing is way out of line... I can't believe I that people are lining up to pay the feds a shit ton of money for bitcoins that they stole. It seems to me that it contradicts the whole purpose of bitcoin.
By that logic we should blacklist all coins that have been involved in some kind of theft or crime. But no one wants to do that expect Mike Hearn. |
|
|
|
As we move into bitcoin economy , where there is merchant adoption universally and you are able to buy anything with bitcoin, there is no point an average guy would put his savings in a bank, He could save even a million dollars worth of money in a encrypted paper wallet.
Now banks will lose all the minimum balance that it recommends for having an account, Now banks will not have any money to loan out and hence the entire banking system collapses.
On the other side bitcoin 2.0 applications like counterparty, ethereum will enable crowdfunding and other financial derivatives and decentralized exchanges which will affect the investment banks. Because you don't rely on a central institution like banks to raise your capital.
What other ways could banks face disruption by bitcoin?
What if banks offered competitive interest rates on deposited fiat? |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is so vulnerable to a 51% attack. Ghash supposedly has 45% of hashing power, but what about the Unknown category? I am not willing to risk all my bitcoins because of a 51% attack.. I am converting to litecoin, which is being pumped now btw.. This article below explains what a 51% attack is and how you can prevent it. http://www.btcfeed.net/news/51-attack-explained/Sorry to break it to you but Litecoin recently had a pool with 51% as well. The only thing you gain here is switching to a coin that is up against myriad new(not forks of bitcoin) cryptocurrency technologies (NXT/NEM, CryptoNote coins, Qora, CryptCoin ect). And it looks like Litecoin development has no response to the flood of competition. I don't hold any altcoins right now, but one thing I do know is that there doesn't seem to be much reason to be buying Litecoin right now. It's a coin from 2011. |
|
|
|
|
Do you think it would be more intellectually honest if we as a community stopped calling Bitcoin a decentralized digital currency?
When Bitcoin started out the majority of people called it an anonymous cryptocurrency. And it took a little while for people to correctly refer to it as pseudonymous.
With the way mining has evolved and continues to evolve outside of what Satoshi had envisioned I feel that we should be fair in our description of what Bitcoin actually is. At least at the moment. Hopefully changes are made at the protocol level. But for now this is the reality.
This should also apply to any altcoins that share a similar model. I don't know if there are altcoins out there that could call themselves truly decentralised, but the ones that are traditionally mined are probably even more centralised than Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
Anyone expecting some Ebay sniping while the markets dance around in front of a live feed is going to be a bit disappointed.
It's sealed bids and it's quite likely they won't disclose the price unless there's a successful freedom of information request. We may remain in the dark about the price achieved for a long time afterwards, perhaps always.
Well, hopefully one of the bitcoin companies will give us a number at least. Either what they paid for them or what their highest bid was so we know a minimum amount that they went for. I'd really like to know what their value is and I hope we get that information. |
|
|
|
The fixed hash rate idea is really interesting and it sounds good except for the fact that a botnet would easily take over the network. Often the only thing that limits botnets is the fact that most of the computers in the botnet are not very powerful. But in this case it wouldn't matter at all and sheer numbers would be the only thing that mattered. So in order for this to work the coin would absolutely have to have full protection against a >50% attack. Interestly enough a white paper was proposed today with a solution: http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/452.pdf |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
