Gold isn't a very good monetary asset, since it's market is speculative and that makes it unstable. But bitcoin would be far worse, because unlike gold, it has virtually 0% intrinsic value. Stability is what the monetary system needs, because that is very important to develop the economy.
I think "intrinsic value" is bullshit.  I am very serious. In fact, maybe "value" is even a flawed word. Something has properties, which give it utility, which can be desirable for someone. Value is always subjective. (see "a horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse"). So, you actually can't comprehend that gold has irreplaceable value in electronics? Strawman much? First off, I originally specifically said "Gold's monetary utility is also easily replaceable.", already taking into account that gold has other utility than just the monetary one. Secondly, I was talking about the concept of intrinsic value in general. |
|
|
|
Gold isn't a very good monetary asset, since it's market is speculative and that makes it unstable. But bitcoin would be far worse, because unlike gold, it has virtually 0% intrinsic value. Stability is what the monetary system needs, because that is very important to develop the economy.
I think "intrinsic value" is bullshit. I am very serious. In fact, maybe "value" is even a flawed word. Something has properties, which give it utility, which can be desirable for someone. Value is always subjective (see "a horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse"). |
|
|
|
Gold isn't a very good monetary asset, since it's market is speculative and that makes it unstable. But bitcoin would be far worse, because unlike gold, it has virtually 0% intrinsic value. Stability is what the monetary system needs, because that is very important to develop the economy.
I think "intrinsic value" is bullshit. Also, gold is impractical as a means of exchange, which hinders its "stickyness" and price stability. If bitcoin scales well and has increased adoption, it would become more stable. |
|
|
|
Can we go up now like crossing $20k and more
I'm still kicking myself for not selling off the rest of the coin I have loaded on the exchange when it last bounced off $11,500. You could do worse, like shorting with leverage around 6800 and going long again around 9800... |
|
|
|
I'm not a big fan of investing into precious metals with highly speculative markets, but BTC vs gold, I would choose gold. Bitcoin may be limited, but it is also easily replaceable. This makes it's value far more fragile.
With PoW vs PoS, the environment isn't an issue, but the cost of production is an issue. It's all about the numbers, talks about the environment is just for PR.
Gold's monetary utility is also easily replaceable... with bitcoin. We might see that play out over the next decades. |
|
|
|
They do have too much power in their dev team who operates like a company and it will bite them but it could possibly make it easy for governments acceptance.
But... what if technology can't fundamentally support that "too much power" stuff ? That's what we're starting to see with mETH, and the mETH-heads are too busy getting high on gas to see the forest through the trees. The forest be burning, yo. Ethereum isn't as great as people want to pretend, there isn't a lot of smart contracts actually being used. The saving grace of Eth is their switch to Casper, which we'll have all these environmentalist who don't understand anything about crypto but that Eth will use way less mining power now and they think it should be used instead of Bitcoin . The big issue they're missing is Bitcoin miners are essentially building tons of infrastructure for these hydroelectric, geothermic areas and of course love solar and wind but fuck that logic. Look, I am a big bitcoin enthusiast, but building infrastructure to use up more alternative energy is not energy-neutral or energy-positive (unless you assume there is some of scaling effect in which technologies only become developed after they grow large enough, and then you would assume that the added electricity demand is just what the world needed to get to that threshold, which seems unlikely) . So no, bitcoin mining is not positive for the environment. It might be that POW is the only good method for a cryptocurrency (I haven't really looked that deeply into other systems), but lets not create make-believe stories. |
|
|
|
|
I did great until end of February-March, then I got overconfident again and since have been making mistake after mistake, going leveraged when I shouldn't have etc. At more than 1 point did I manage to actually buy/sell the local top/bottom.
After going through a period of grief for my lost stash, I now barely look at the charts anymore.
TL;DR : When you are a greedy pig, try to make sure you are not stupid as well.
|
|
|
|
|
So yeah, I just ate a big shit sandwhich...
|
|
|
|
If bitcoin goes to 35,000 why is it any better then your local house tripling in price and becoming an unavailable purchase for the younger generation in that neighbourhood. We might view a higher price as a positive but also I think it brings some negatives with it, because the market is both buyers and sellers.
I'm really more interested in the underlying market developing, I know the price is nice to see rise as a positive indicator but revenue and general population of bitcoin users rising is probably a great positive longer term
Assuming a stable purchasing power of USD, 35k BTC will be just as useful money as 5k BTC (except maybe that 35k BTC might be more liquid and less volatile). On the other hand, a house is something that you need. Although there is a certain degree of elasticity, you'll need a certain amount of square footage for you or your family to live in comfortably. If you can buy that house for 100k, you might be fine. If you need to buy that house for 1M because of the market, you might be shit out of luck, and your wellbeing will suffer for it. |
|
|
|
very quick short list for a small "game list" or how i have to call it..... only when breaking 12288 dollar price..... almost same rules as the list before just a winning date
I ll take 15/04/2019, thanks! Hi Mic, I saw I was added for 2018 instead of 2019. |
|
|
|
very quick short list for a small "game list" or how i have to call it..... only when breaking 12288 dollar price..... almost same rules as the list before just a winning date
I ll take 15/04/2019, thanks! |
|
|
|
...BTC is not meant to become the definitive payment method...
That's not true. BTC is not complete if we can't use it as a payment method. BTC had problems because exchanges were spamming the network by not batching their transactions and many of them are only recently upgraded to segwit. If you can't pass your bitcoin to the next person to get something in return, its no better than tulips. To achieve these problems and stay as decentralized as possible, bitcoin/lightning devs created the Lightning Network but its still not fully adopted yet. (because its in beta) So we can expect even more growth in the future. I agree bitcoin was suddenly being described as a store of wealth when it failed as a payment system due to long confirmation times and excessive fees. Disagree, there were both people interested as a store of value and people interested in it as a payment system from the start. |
|
|
|
FWIW, my prediction for the next few days is that we'll test the previous low of ~$5850, then bounce back to $7,000+.
FWIW, I think we will bounce to 7600-ish starting now. |
|
|
|
I don't think there is any panic in the market.  Everyone is realizing that some whale is selling desparately with the hope to convince the traders there is absolutely positively no manipulation. So far utter disaster for him/her. The volume is so low that probably with the exception of this whale no one is selling. Hodlers can't be tricked so easily. The next halvening is at the corner and even if the price falls temporarily under 7K, in less than 2 years the traders will start to buy in preparation of the halvening. After that the pressure on the price will be much lighter (only 900 BTC per day, vs 1800 now) and for another 1-2 years BTC will be heading to 50-100K.  But let's see what the bulls are preparing for this April. This whale is risking unwisely to be left behind with hudreds of millions loss, if we have a continuous upward trend like in April and May 2017. Ah yes, the magical single entity that explains everything. Seems quite ingrained in human psychology. I do hold your belief that we will go to 50-100k too though . |
|
|
|
Holy crap why did I not pay attention to the okex futures....  I swear to god bitcoin, it's like you are punishing me for only looking every hour or so. |
|
|
|
I would gladly trade places with romneymoney...
The picture still isn't inconsistent with a more rapid recovery. I'd like to see a bottom by May-June time, preferably above $4K. A repeat of 2014 can't exactly be waved off either, but it seems almost a little too obvious and easy? Maybe I'm overcomplicating my analysis, but if there's one thing I've learnt from Bitcoin, it's that price rarely treads the easy path. True, which is why I chose january in the first place, thinking a end of 2013 type of scenario might be in the cards. At the moment I would place a higher chance on the recovery taking a longer time though. However fundamentally things are certainly looking fine. |
|
|
|
only 24 left ----let the bull season start again so we can have a new game in here with a little bull sentiment in my haed i hope to erase the last 4 so we would have 20 names and withe a little extra bull thoughts i'm hoping 28/08/2018 will be the last date of this list , BUT we will see offcourse whats gonna happen  What, no love for the yefi?  I do think Bitserve has a good chance if we see a quick recovery. He picked a very nice range of dates. Hopefully we won't be in for cryptowinter, otherwise it's gonna be luckgenough56. I would gladly trade places with romneymoney... |
|
|
|
Anybody that has run the numbers knows that the current network cannot even remotely handle global transactional demand.
And Lightning Network is the answer to that. Not just more block size pile on. Again, block size increases have nothing to do with the promotion of increasing userbase or merchant adoption. If that were the case, merchants and end users would be going crazy for BCash right now. News flash, Walter Cronkite: They aren't. I already addressed that in my original post... Of course, LN might give us a lot of leeway, but eventually block sizes will need to be increased.
Dryja and Poon specifically mentioned the need to eventually increase block sizes in the original LN proposal. |
|
|
|
You do realize that as soon as there is an increased demand for transactions again, fees will go through the roof again, right?
So you are saying that we need to architect for speculative, pump-and-dump throughput that happens over a few month period every 2-3 years? It literally sounds like you are saying that. That was never the use case nor the purpose of Bitcoin. Maybe you should get your head out of your ass so you can better hear what I am saying instead of making up your own shit. Anybody that has run the numbers knows that the current network cannot even remotely handle global transactional demand. The amount of people using bitcoin worldwide is still quite tiny. I would hope that it is our goal to increase our userbase and thus the amount of places and people that accept your bitcoins. |
|
|
|
Btw, I just wanted to take a second and set a few folks here straight.
You fkn big blocker trolls, BCash shills, and even some Bitcoin bulls who were whining all last year about too high transaction fees and how Bitcoin absolutely NEEDED > 1mb block size and like IMMEDIATELY.
With the Bitcoin mempool nearly empty and 1 sat/B transactions clearing in minutes, you guys can go rightly fk off for good. Seriously. Don't even try to raise that argument here ever, EVER again. Piss off.
Spent soooo much time arguing with you fuckheads last year, now you have fk all of an argument to stand on.
/rant
You do realize that as soon as there is an increased demand for transactions again, fees will go through the roof again, right? Of course, LN might give us a lot of leeway, but eventually block sizes will need to be increased. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
