I think in 5 years Bitcoin will be known to almost everybody on this planet, but will they be using it that's a question. I think most of them will but can't say for everyone.
That's the reality they may know bitcoin but also another is that, they will know it for good reason or with bad? Because many are already have knowledge in bitcoin but their knowledge into is very bad, thinking that bitcoin is just something that is being used for bad things, illegal activities and other types of crimes which is very unfair but its the reality. Knowing bitcoin to everyone for its beneficial purpose is important and i dont think everybody in the world be introduced to bitcoins even after 5 years. I can say that bitcoins will be used in majority of the nations if not all. Most under developed areas still not having Internet cannot use bitcoins without infrastructure of Internet and computers. This is what I think too, many are still going to be lack of knowledge on what is bitcoin and 5 years is not going to be enough from now on to let the world know that bitcoin is existing. But still it depends on how the developers or us will use technology since there are social medias and other platforms we can use to advertise, it just really depends on how we are going to attract people or unless the government will force people to use it before 2022. and specially in third world countries and backward area, where people even do have their basic facilities like electric city and education, the education ration in such countries are very low. they even do not have access to computer and internet. therefore i do not think that is such an easy task i think may be less that 10% of the total population may be using bitcoin as optional. while rest will still depend on their fiat currencies. Bitcoin without any doubt has a very strong appeal and given the abysmal state of most fiat currencies, the awareness and adoption of Bitcoin is sure to soar, but getting to be adopted by the about 7 billion people that presently inhabit the earth by 2022 is like day dreaming. All the same, it ought not to be an issue whether everyone embraces Bitcoin or not, just a significant portion of the world's population is just okay for Bitcoin to be all it could possibly be. Come to think of it, with the user base at present, we are beginning to experience crowded network and so much delays in confirmation of transactions, how worse can it get if drastic measures are not taken now? I think our primary concern now show be to have Bitcoin truly ready for mass adoption, because it is sure to happen someday given the goings-on in the finances of many countries across the globe. Bitcoin needs a stable value before it has mass appeal. Nobody wants a currency that they ant have a reasonable expectation what the value will be day to day. Bitcoin routinely fluctuates 5% in a single day, and 20% movements are not uncommon. This is anathema to a currency. The usd, which devalues very slowly over long periods of time, is far superior for transactions that a currency whose value is a giant question mark every day. |
|
|
|
If you had to convert all your wealth to either Bitcoin or gold and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that Bitcoin has only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.
I certainly would choose bitcoin, but with bitcoin records may be used for investment should not only be kept until a certain time, certainly bitcoin will be more beneficial when compared to gold I would prefer to diversify, but probably most of the investment would be made in Bitcoin. Both Bitcoin and gold are good ways to store value, but Bitcoin is capable of something that gold can not do, which is the ability to be sent over the internet easily and in a decentralized way. I think that makes things a lot easier. Yeah bitcoin is far better then gold as an investment and the best thing about bitcoin is it can be sent or received across the globe and if you have good skills you can also earn them without making any investment which is never possible with gold and bitcoin can also give us huge profits in future comparatively gold is stable and profits would be limited upto a certain extent. Gold could be earned without investment as well. It is, after all, a naturally occurring element. You could physically mine for gold the same way you can digitally mine for bitcoin. Given the difficulty of the algorithm at this point, you might be more likely to find gold in the ground than solve a block reward, unless you've spent thousands of dollars on ASICs, but then that wouldn't be an investment-free income at that point. |
|
|
|
I think the best way to have guaranteed passive income (if we aren't talking specifically Bitcoin) is to invest in bank stocks. In general, they give 3-5% yield per year in dividends, and the value is very steady. Plus, investing in something like a bank provides a lot of security; they'll always be around.
That's more of a low-effort method. If you are willing to spend a lot of time and energy, then looking into something like app-dev is definitely worth it.
Banking stocks can be pretty risky because of how complicated their businesses are. They don't merely take deposits and make loans anymore. They have very convoluted trading operations and deal heavily in derivatives. During the financial meltdown in 2008, many banks disappeared because the actions they were taking were so risky, and the banks that didn't go under suffered monstrous losses. Because of how interconnected they are, there weren't many banks that escaped unscathed. Banking is definitely one industry I am not interested in as an investor. If you want stable dividends, REITs are far more predictable and far safer, plus their tax structure necessitates paying out 90% of their income in dividends in order to maintain a tax advantaged status. |
|
|
|
Just type in google passive income revenue share and you will see revenue share for invest you get 155%roi just you need to invest for short term.I offer rcb for that site.
That almost certainly sounds like a scam or ponzi scheme. Any investment that 1) promises high rates of return or 2) necessitates you to only invest for short terms before it falls apart is not reputable. Also, googling passive income or revenue share programs is likely to net you only people who are trying to rip you off. |
|
|
|
|
That's interesting. I would have figured the calculation for transaction fees would be pretty standard at this point, and since I've never noticed any real lag when making transactions (outside of last summer when it seemed like the whole damn network was slogged down with congestion), it furthered that notion that something as basic as calculating an appropriate transaction fee was not an issue for any of these services. What online wallets would you recommend in lieu of blockchain.info's wallets?
|
|
|
|
To date, the dollar is probably the most important currency of the world. If only imagine that the dollar will fail, many countries will have a very serious problem and the crisis could lead to the collapse of the economy. And no one wants and not be able to prevent. Therefore, the entire financial system and the banking system of the world will keep the strength of the dollar until the end.
Whose economy do you mean exactly? If you mean the world's economy at large, I don't think it will cause massive collapse of it, at least as long as the US economy itself doesn't collapse itself which is still the largest economy in the world (sharing the first place with the Chinese economy if I'm not mistaken). In any case, the collapse of the dollar can itself be only the consequence of the American economy meltdown, not the cause of it. Regarding the international trade, if such events should happen, the trading countries would either use gold backed unit of account (say, gold certificates denominated in ounces of gold) or just start trading using their national currencies as it already happens between certain countries (e.g. Russia and China). The dollar is only a tool for settling accounts (difference between imports and exports between countries), as such it is irrelevant since it can be easily substituted with another unit of account Can you envision a scenario in which the USD fails but the US economy remains in tact? Whether an economy or the underlying currency fails first seems to be a question of the chicken or the egg. It would seem to be that they are so closely linked that the failure of either would necessitate the failure of the other. |
|
|
|
If people are using bitcoin instead of USD to do illegal things then that would put bitcoin in danger now because Donald Trump might seize all the bitcoins.
How exactly do you think you would go about "seizing" all the bitcoins? The ledger is decentralized, so there is no way to shut it down. Seizing bitcoins would require the confiscation of the hard drives that contain private keys to public addresses. And that also assumes that those hard drives have the only copy of the private keys. In short, there's no easy or feasible way to accomplish bitcoin seizures. |
|
|
|
|
The type of currency is rather irrelevant. Anything that has widespread value can be used to fund illegal activities, and more, should be expected to be doing so. USD, Euro, Yen, btc, gold, diamonds, drugs, etc. The medium is fungible, criminals will be criminals. The currency doesn't make them so.
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin shouldn't be seen as an alternative currency but rather the digital currency that has the potential of being decentralized.
Can you obtain fiat without working for it first? no, can you obtain bitcoin without proving that you worked for it? no. you might be able to gift them to someone but the origin of each bitcoin is stamped with the proof of work, in fact no other currencies are as legit as bitcoin.
Saying bitcoin can not replace fiat is like saying X currency can not replace Y currency, of course that's impossible every currency has it's own users and in this case everyone has the potential of becoming one, most important part is the community believing in BTC.
The "work" done to create bitcoin is completely without value outside of the bitcoin ecosystem though. It's not serving any utility except self-propagation. Work done to earn money is done out of economic necessity, or because the market demands it. The market doesn't demand an invented algorithm be solved in order to create bitcoins, absent actual value assigned to those bitcoins in the first place. In other words, in the real world, work needing to be done gives money value, since the money is traded for the work. In bitcoin, the value of bitcoin creates demand for work. The relationship is reversed. |
|
|
|
I am very sure, paper money survive no more than 50 years, this is because the Earth has been very badly damaged, thus the use of papers are forbidden, including to make money.
interesting thought , but there is a lot of crumbly paper too , so it shouldn't be a problem anymore if they want to keep printing the pape money , imho applying digital money needed hundred years , so i doubt within 50 year paper moneycan be replaced. "Paper" money isn't actually paper anyway. It's a mixture of linen and cotton. It's far more durable than if bills were made out of actual paper. Any bill that got wet would basically disintegrate. But the "paper" money we have now can survive being wet, or even being washed in a washing machine. It's durable for a reason. |
|
|
|
Paper money is only limited by earth's supply of trees  At least digital currency is "backed" by the mining's ever-soaring level of difficulty. This built-in scarcity model prevents deflation of bitcoin value, raises the miners' bar for return on investment, and thereby guarantees a steady climb in price. Each transaction buyer wants to hold for a later price rise, and so on down the line. Not every trader can outwait their own need for their own fiat currency, so naturally there are trades at a loss. Whoever has the most patience and greatest wealth can end up with a large hoard of bitcoins. Mining difficulty in no way backs the value of bitcoin. Mining difficulty is only a result of how many computers are solving the algo that mints coins. Whether bitcoin was worth $1000 or $1, it wouldn't directly affect the difficulty of the mining. The built-in scarcity does not give it a floor value. If that was true, any altcoin with fewer than 21 million possible coins would have a price point higher than bitcoin. What gives bitcoin value is the collective belief by people holding it or seeking to buy it that it will continue to have value. It's just a confidence game. Well in mining there is more chance of running out coins to be mines than trees running out first. Also if Trees are the problem there is a lot of ways now creating a new fiat currency and that is the use of Fibers from fruits and other materials. Also the government does not need to develop new prints of money because it creates an imbalance in the economy. Remember they control the flow of currency in the country. Most new dollar creation is digital these days compared to physical money anyway. So worrying about "running out of trees," while not a major concern to begin with, is even less of a concern in today's economy. All the bitcoins will be mined long before we run out of trees. Especially since money isn't made out of trees to begin with! |
|
|
|
maybe yes. if bitcoin hit $10.000, maybe we must pay $100 for a cup of coffe  in this case with 1 BTC ($100.000) we can't buy home Fiat will automaticaly worthless because of it's inflation, just wait until government print a lot of fiat. Probably the nominal is increase but the value is the same. I think bitcoin need to be used directly to make fiat worthless. The USD has lost 95% of its value since 1913, but that hasn't made it worthless. In fact, even though that statistic is brandies about as evidence of how unstable the dollar is, or as evidence of how "evil" the fed is, the US economy is stable and inflation is reasonable. You have to use 100 year time periods to see the "drastic" devaluation cited, but nobody generally lives long enough to lose such a significant portion of their savings to inflation There are three kinds of lies - lies, damned lies, and statistics When someone says that the dollar has lost 95% of its value since 1913, this figure looks mind-boggling of course, but we should compare it with the income that might have been earned on this dollar. Since this is the American dollar, we should take the American bonds as the yardstick which have the same risk as the dollar itself since they are issued by the same US government. Since we are talking about long terms, we should obviously take the longest term US bonds, say, 10 or 30 year bonds, and when we calculate their income with interest compounded, we will see that bonds, which are basically the same dollars with interest paid on them, would well outperform inflation of the dollar as such Not only that, but there are also TIPS bonds, which are Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities. They pay a set interest rate, and then also pay an additional rate on top of that that is pegged to inflation, so as to negate the dilutive power of dollar creation over time. But you are correct that the 10, 20, and 30 year bond yields are currently above the rate of inflation, and have been for some time. You might have to go back to the 70s or 80s, when inflation was quite high, to find a time when inflation outpaced long term treasury yields. |
|
|
|
On a related note, I've also been working on a cool "deposit booster" for everyone who has bitcoin deposits stuck. I typically get like ~10+ support requests a day about people who are in that situation (please folks: stop using blockchain.info's wallet).
I haven't hooked it up yet, but I have a rough proof of concept working. For the technical it simply creates a transaction that spends from your (unconfirmed) deposit to a new bitcoin address (i.e. 1 input and 1 output) and because it pays transaction fees, it'll boost the priority for deposit itself. There will be no (extra) fee for such service, you just pay for the bitcoin mining fee of the deposit boost. Based on my testing it seems like ~30% of bitcoin hash power supports this (CPFP) so it's not amazingly good, but it'll be useful in the stuck case.
The really cool thing about it, is there's no risk for me (since i'm spending from that specific deposit).
Now I also need to figure out how to explain this to users, as there will be "boost deposit" and "precredit deposit" lol ><
What is it about blockchain.info's wallet? As a non-super serious Bitcoin user, I've relied on them as a wallet (for admittedly low volume, non-demanding transactions), and haven't noticed any issues on my end. Are they known to cause problems for users or the eco-system? |
|
|
|
Buying bitcoins on a low price is a passive income, at least for me. Say, if you bought at $200 and right now it's currently sitting at $400, haven't you profited off of it? What if the price of your Bitcoin never rose beyond $200 or even took a dive to less than $100, would you perhaps say, "I have made a negative passive income" The scenario you cited above is nothing but mere trading and miles away from being a passive income. Do you notice you must have to perform another task - placing another trade for another profit making opportunity to ever be possible? Passive income actually works like machine, set like once and forget. Honestly its not a passive income we can not called it passive income because you are just waiting for the price increase to get profit.. that actually there is no assurance that the price kind be jump high.. almost all are depends in demand and supply. The passive income that i think we can call if you have a stable job.. not contract job.. this is i think we can say passive income because monthly you can get your salary.. |
|
|
|
Sometimes I have been a bit skeptical about this possibility, but many people were also skeptical when mobile phones emerged 30 years ago and anyone believed that almost everybody would be using them these days.
So I am starting to think it may be possible, but of course this disruptive technology will also need several years to achieve that expected massive adoption.
Mobile phones have an incredibly high utility and revolutionized communications and access to information. Bitcoin isn't even close to that level of disruption or technological revolution. It's a novel idea, sure, and it has some utility, but the level of utility is absolutely dwarfed by what the mobile phone did for communications. |
|
|
|
Even if bitcoin is $10,000 or any amount,fiat will never be worthless as long as majority of the people will use it on a daily basis. Fiat is easy to use and you can bring it anywhere.
It's not people using fiat that keeps it valuable. Plenty of people were using currencies that were undergoing hyperinflation in the past. In Germany, the German Mark was used by all German citizens, but that didn't save its value from the rapid devaluation brought on by the governments disasterous economic policies. |
|
|
|
maybe yes. if bitcoin hit $10.000, maybe we must pay $100 for a cup of coffe in this case with 1 BTC ($100.000) we can't buy home Fiat will automaticaly worthless because of it's inflation, just wait until government print a lot of fiat. Probably the nominal is increase but the value is the same. I think bitcoin need to be used directly to make fiat worthless. The USD has lost 95% of its value since 1913, but that hasn't made it worthless. In fact, even though that statistic is brandies about as evidence of how unstable the dollar is, or as evidence of how "evil" the fed is, the US economy is stable and inflation is reasonable. You have to use 100 year time periods to see the "drastic" devaluation cited, but nobody generally lives long enough to lose such a significant portion of their savings to inflation. |
|
|
|
I can't tell what you're saying the problem is. The transaction you posted warns of a double spend. Are you saying that a withdrawal you made from the site is giving out a double spend warning? Otherwise, not clear what you mean by you asked to "grab a request" or that "Bitcoin grabbed from your site." |
|
|
|
whether revenue from the website also includes passive income? every day I take the time for this forum and my website I have to make a minimum of 1 articles in 3 days, when I first tried it's hard, but hard work is followed with great results
Yep. This is my passive income too. Joining in signature campaign is great for me. It makes me make a profit every week. And I am happy because of simple replying and maki it constructive makes me a passive income. So for signature campaign us the best passive income here in bitcointalk and internet. There is nothing called "Passive income" - there must be some active role otherwise no one is going to pay your for free. Writing articles does need active brain functions and thinking. Making constructive posts and participating in signature campaigns need time and thought and reasoning. Hence they are not passive income - in fact there is no such thing as passive income. Oh mate, you're quite limiting yourself. Savings accounts are passive income. Treasury bills are passive income. Company issued bonds are passive income. Stocks that pay dividends are passive income. There is no shortage of ways to earn passive income. Not only is it a thing, but it's quite a common way investment professionals help manage risk and maximize gain. |
|
|
|
Your $800 prediction correction comes early, I know certain that Bitcoin will test $2000 before the end of the year because there are so many economy in distress presently.
Yup i also was a bit surprised it even went below 950 in just a few days. Though knowing bitcoin and being able to talk to people who've been using btc for years now, i'm pretty sure bitcoin would be able to bounce back hopefully stronger after this. It's not really alarming as the price is a bit steady now so hopefully we continue the trend that bridged 2016 and 2017 Such variations are necessary, corrections occur in any market. I think what scared people was the fact that the price dropped sharply just after the ATH. The good news is that the price is rising more slowly and steadily than before, so this can be a good sign, especially for long term holders. Another good news is that this year will happen things that have never happened before, such as the launch ETFs for Bitcoin and the participation of major investors. If the price manages to stay at the current levels which is very likely, it would give more confidence to new investors. Yes, stable prices will get more investors attracted toward bitcoins. I believe that attraction will decide new directions for bitcoins in 2017. When bitcoin will be having huge value, we can expect many companies start accepting bitcoins so slowly bitcoin will hit mainstream adoption. Who knows? it may happen within 2017 itself too. "Investors" don't want stable prices, they want appreciating prices or volatility, because that's where the opportunity to profit is. Speculators don't care about a stable value. Look at the two times btc hit over $1000... that's what brought tons of new people in to btc, the look of easy gains. Stable value would be good for the currency, not necessarily for increased adoption since that's not what's bringing new people in. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
