What we need is regulation, not for the price, but for exchanges, projects, ICOs and such. We lack guidelines for these projects and that leads to scams, thefts, etc. That is the only thing I can think of that we lack. If we're able to do this, then trust from the general public would be gained, next are the investors, and all will follow. If we can't avoid scams, we must somehow do something to prevent or penalize them.

Having it listed is not enough. They need to hear it often to trigger their curiosity to research more about bitcoin's background, satoshi and Satoshi Nakamoto, and evetually the whole crypto-space terms and ideology. But still, it's good to see that even them recognizes its existence and not just having bitcoin in their dictionaries. Soon, when popularity increases, traditional fiat money would decrease usage, and people would start looking to digital ways of payment, then comes the time more articles and online resources would enlist cryptocurrency-related terminologies.

If you believe that bitcoin and other crypto would be the future's currency, then even if you lose some amount of money today, you would not worry because you're rest assured that the technology has great potential to even replace current mometary systems. However, we should not be complacent with bitcoin. We cannot predict the future, we don't know what would happen next, if there'll be a more advanced, more viable cryptocurrency that would overtake bitcoin. Or if regulations got far and would make transaction of bitcoin feel like underground market. We should not close our mind to possibilities even if it's not positive.

That's a possibility but still far and unlikely to happen. You're right that cryptocurrencies would be the thing if this would happen since if financial crisis would happen, all these currencies would crash and people will seek for alternatives to where they'll put their funds. But I don't think it's going to happen soon and I don't hope it will. Bitcoin will gain popularity and it's much better if done on a steady manner than just a bubble that would burst once the crisis was over.

If crisis would lead to total crash and no recovery, then cryptocurrency would come into play and may replace existing currencies. But we're still far from it.

It's an eye-opener to me that some first world countries are already near going cashless. I can point out some pros and cons according to the documentary and from my own opinion of going completely cashless. Note that I haven't finished the documentary.

Cashless Society
Current situation points:
1. Almost all shops in Germany are going cashless.
2. For businesses, it's easier and faster to open up since they don't have to setup cash in counters.
3. I don't think it would be much applicable to third world countries where internet and technology are limited to the middle class people.

Pros:
1. It's much easier and faster.
2. Having cash is prone to thefts, or misplacement by the owner.
3. Keeps track of records where the money is going.
4. Eliminates most illegal activities that uses cash to transact.

Cons:
1. Privacy concerns for Pros#3. All purchases are recorded.
2. Fewer jobs, since banks and shops will no longer be needing much employees.
3. Needs constant internet connection just to make puchases.
4. For small amounts, this would be more of a hassle than a convenience.

I find it fascinating for you to come up with your analogy. And yes, I quite agree on that perpective. If your story is true that on a non-biased blindfold taste test, Pepsi got more votes, then your analogy would be on point. (You should've pasted the link of the documentary for people to also watch).

People use fiat because the government backs it up, and living under a government, you feel obliged to use their currency. However, as much as Bitcoin is good as mode of payment, we should not totally abandon fiat. We still need to pay taxes. The only thing that should be change is the perspective of the public about being close-minded and not accepting new modes of currency such as cryptocurrencies.

This is exactly what I have been telling when someone in the forum asks if regulation is bad. There's someone that needs to oversee ICOs if they conform with the standards. For the exchanges, to ensure that they use standards in security that will increase the trust of new investors in investing to cryptocurrencies. This is because some exchanges have security flaws that thefts are happening to their platform, but no "authority" is in action to make the exchange responsible for the asset loss.

Having regulatory board would not mean centralization, the whole trade and supply-demand would remain untouched. It's just that these scams should at least be lessen to further attract more investors to the crypto-market.

If altcoins were never made, I suspect that bitcoin would not grow so much either. Part of the altcoin trading is that altcoins are used to be exchanged from and to bitcoin, then to local currencies. If altcoins did not exist, demand for bitcoin and awareness of people is lesser than we had today. Who would want to buy something that cannot be seen and can only be traded to USD or your local currency? People would just trade in Forex instead. That's why altcoins still has part on where bitcoin today is.

It's interesting to see efforts made to discuss cryptocurrencies to the general public. That's why I'm really positive about bitcoin's success in the future years or even decades. We are step by step, closer to a world who has adopted bitcoin to be accepted as a method of payment. We are still in the early stage, more technologies would still develop in different aspects including modern payment methods. It's not quick, but at least we know that it's getting more relevant in the current age.

That's unexpected, but a good start to spreading the word about cryptocurrencies. If more people would become aware of its existence and would attract more investors, the market would indeed grow. However, there's still a lot to go through. We're still far away from almost complete adoptation. It's still good to see that the word is spreading especially in third world countries such as the Philippines.

There's also a possibility that it would replace current payment systems, but there's still uncertainty.

I think one thing that makes user think again before adopting cryptocurrencies is the fact that it's too volatile. But in terms of payment only, not as an investment, I strongly believe that one point in time, crypto would be more widely used than these payment systems. However, I think bitcoin would lead the race, it's much lesser of a risk and has no signs of completely crashing down unlike some altcoins.

Various online shops are already accepting bitcoin as payment since it's relatively easier and fewer fees are paid.

I appreciate your willingness to bring kmowledge regarding the matter. Blockchain is indeed not an original idea of Satoshi. However, I think you should revise the title of the thread. It's like you are telling the people that Blockchain did not create Satoshi, which is in many ways wrong since Satoshi is human and technology cannot create a human. Kidding aside, I hope this would clarify beliefs of newcomers here that Blockchain and bitcoin are the same, and that they had the same creator, which is false.

There's a chance it would boost the market but let's still hope the situation would be better for Hong Kong and China. Crypto would be a viable option to store assets, however they could lose a lot, but the good thing is it's free from China's strict control since it's decentralized. However, I'm not sure of people in Hong Kong are aware of these cryptocurrencies and if they do, if it would bring that much impact to the current prices.

You cannot stop monetary inflation. Fiat or cryptocurrencies, they both experience inflation since there are new bitcoins created on intervals, the supply increases and therefore would create inflationary effect when demand does not keep up with the supply. You can, though, slow down the creation but you cannot remove the supply already in circulation to create deflation. Crypto won't solve poverty just like that. You cannot evade inflation. Another thing to note is the volatility of crypto-market that won't benefit at all times.

I think it would be beneficial if it would be able to regulate and implement policies to existing exchanges and declare international standards for security and such before an enterprise opens up an exchange. This is to prevent thefts, scams, etc.

Having a central agency does not necessarily mean the system would be centralized. The supply/demand and block generation, as well as trades are still decentralized and controlled by the traders. I don't see a problem here. And also, it does not mean it would collect every single address owner and his details. It's just to have someone responsible to exchanges with unsecure platforms.

This is much more beneficial to crypto in general since most of the scams come from altcoins and various crypto-related projects.

This is why the government wants to prohibit usage of crypto. It's because of these news thay portray bad image to cryptocurrencies, and also the reason why we should have regulatory boards to oversee crypto-related projects, such as these exchanges, various ICOs, and other services.

If the exchange won't take action and pay the victim his loss, then it should be punishable by law. The problem is that no concrete laws are passed and to implement invloving the current crypto-space.

Current price does not determine which is stronger than what. US Dollar is definitely stronger since it's dominating the market in terms of trades, reserves and is generally accepted to have value. For your question as to why Euro has higher price, it's because the total market supply of Euro is far lower than that of USD. Lower supply would mean higher prices.

All fiat currencies experience monetary inflation, even Bitcoin has. New bitcoin is generated on intervals, which raises supply and decreasing price, same goes with fiat currencies.

I believe we are still far away in a complete digital currency world. There is still a need to fiat form of currency since not all people has the access to stable internet connection and reliable technology to be able to transact digital money. Just think of third world countries such as Africa. It is still needed to exist, but there's a possibility it will be completely replaced. But I don't think it's soon to happen, it would take a lot of time to revolutionize current payment systems.

Engaging in bitcoin, you should already know beforehand the stress fluctuations would deliver. It's either you're happy or you're stressed. If you don't want an emotional rollercoaster, invest maybe in stock market. It's muchess volatile and it's unlikely that you'll lose such huge amounts in quick timespan. But reward is long-term so you should also be patient when investing in stocks. Or just be calm on trading and learn to decide under pressure, assess the current situation and factors that may affect the price.

If you're not short in cash right now, I suggest to just hodl your assets. If bitcoin would continue to grow despite all attempts to rectrict its usage, then there's a chance it would reach another all-time high and when that time comes, be sure to sell your bitcoins, because if it crashed again, you'll wait additional years which you had already waited for too long. This is the risk in bitcoin, we cannot know if the market would crash and lay low for long durations of time. It's unpredictable, too much risk but if done right, would bring high reward.