You see them flying.

I'm referring to everything happening China and then mainly the lower class, that's what this thread is about, not the western world. Neither am I referring to external elements such as quality and comfort of life.

This is the best time to lift these people out of their economical exclusion, and as I said before, it's beneficial for the economy as a whole, so what's holding the government back to step in? Turn the unbanked into the banked and in a matter of years you'll see how significant the economical boost is. If the government isn't doing it, these people will remain unbanked for plenty of more years. That even reeks of intentional suppression.

You don't get it.

By default applications and smart contracts running on top of Ethereum are forced to pay fees in Ether instead of their own (could be tokens tied to specific dapps or smart contracts) native currency. It's completely unnecessary and forces everyone to fund their channels with Ether in order to even use it. If you don't have Ether, you are pretty much excluded from network participation.

It's perfectly possible to have dapps and smart contracts run while paying for fees in their own token rather than using Ether. There are various ways to tackle that obstacle, but it's held back by the lead developers for a reason.

The thing with Ethereum is that Vitalik and other lead developers are forcing economical activity on that platform to be settled in Ether, which is pretty much what governments do when they force you to use a specific fiat currency.

There has been more than enough demand for a change to have everything running on top of Ethereum pay for gas in their native currency instead of Ether, which is perfectly sensible, but fiercely blocked by the aforementioned entities. I somewhat get it, because less demand for Ether means more available supply, but the whole point is decentralization and freedom, and yet it isn't allowed to bloom in that specific way.

It's funny how their FAQ states;

Q; How do you generate such outrageous returns?
A; Through a method called pump and dump (and some other bla bla nonsense that I left out).

If that isn't reason enough to stay away, then perhaps the fact that they (obviously) hide themselves behind whoisguard should be that trigger.

By simply avoiding all services hiding themselves behind whoisguard you directly eliminate +90% of the scams. Use whois.domaintools.com/<domain here> to search for any site and directly ditch that garbage. It's not worth the hassle to figure out later on that you invested in a scam. Better safe than sorry.

I nowhere even mentioned that.

My point basically is that governments should stimulate those who aren't capable of catching up with the economical trends themselves. If you look at how the lower class in economical terms hasn't gone through any sort of improvement throughout the last decades, it's safe to say that it won't ever happen if you wait for it. Don't you think the government should be a stimulating factor here?

It's China that we're talking about, so the group of affected people in terms of numbers is more than what we can even think of right now. Imagine what economical boost the Chinese economy will experience when you get those people to 'rank up' and have them be part of the modern economy.

The Bitcoin revolution started at the moment the network went live.

In the end, we should be happy that we won't ever come to a point at which the mass (as in hundreds of millions of users) drop their weight on Bitcoin. Fiat's coexistence makes sure that people have the ability to choose which currency works the best for them, and in some cases that's Bitcoin, and in other cases fiat.

Bitcoin's main selling feature is being decentralized, but that's also it's main weakness when it comes to mass adoption. Let the mass use Bitcoin strictly as store of value and use fiat as money, and the rest will happily utilize Bitcoin as money through LN. I think that's a fair enough balance allowing Bitcoin to remain the decentralized safe haven for as long as realistically possible.

That was the most realistic side of the story.

The less realistic side of the story, but most preferable outcome, is that satoshis become units of value on their own. Gold had that status at a given point, and Bitcoin might gain that what Gold lost back then. I know most people can't even imagine Bitcoin reaching that state, but we have enough historical evidence that Bitcoin has always been underestimated and has done that what the many didn't expect to happen. I'm quite optimistic yet realistic.

Should I tell you something? I actually prefer these sort of "bearish" predictions over all the senseless $20,000-$50,000 predictions coming from fake ass permabulls.

People shouldn't let a prediction type article get the better of them, but instead use it as a motivational step towards even more growth later on. Banksters pointing out that the price should stabilize around $5000 is actually quite a bullish indicator. It means that they see the value in Bitcoin instead of calling it a fraud that's not worth even $100.

I don't think he's that unrealistic with what he said. His previous statement back in June; Bitcoin is a buy if it falls below $5000, which yet again indicates confidence in Bitcoin.

We have to take in mind that Bitcoiners like we are and corporate bobos will never come together completely, we can just lessen the gap that seperates us.

Bitcoin isn't exactly far away from where it started around 9 years ago. I haven't seen much that actually justifies any optimism towards further growth development on levels other than speculation. Back in the days Bitcoin was a currency, it turned into a speculative game, and now we are out to regain that what we "lost" years ago to boost utility value.

As far as price increases go, I think they will remain part of this market. People shouldn't forget that the more people own Bitcoin, the less there is available to buy on spot exchanges, and thus the more likely it is for extreme price movements to follow us even when we're heading towards $100,000 levels.

Is that so? Bitcoin is pretty much everything people credit Gold for, but it has never really fulfilled its promise. Bitcoin is here to change that.

Most people aren't that easily shifted from mindset with how they either invested more than what they can afford, or they invested with borrowed money. I hope that you don't fit in either of the aforementioned categories, which will significantly increases your chances to relocate your focus. Those who don't won't rest till they sold everything they have unfortunately.

Bull runs are great for those who bought in early on, but what people don't realize is that when traders cash out their profits at peak levels, there is a large group of people on the other side losing big time. Money doesn't miraculously fall out of the sky. It shifts from the dumb right into the pockets of the smart. It's not for nothing that in pretty much every market, +90% of the participants are losers. In other words, know that it's more likely to lose than to win.

In my opinion it's always the government that should be the one to blame, especially with how you as government are responsible for the fact that there are different levels of economical exclusion. In the last couple of years not even one single thing has been done to at least address the gap between various classes in their economy. It seems to me that they are just thinking that problems will solve themselves, but this is obviously not the case as everyone can clearly see.

And yes, Bitcoin and other crypto currencies should be and are definitely part of the casshless revolution, but in lesser form. The thing is that crypto in general isn't mainstream ready, and you are dealing with significant levels of volatility which isn't helping either. It will remain a niche for at least a couple of more year, and that allows centralized payment platforms to keep gaining dominance.

If we relate this to crypto, then money is definitely a motivating factor.

Development of decentralized exchanges and other decentralized applications (Open Bazaar for example) has been extremely slow throughout the last couple of years, and this is purely the result of less incentive to work on something that doesn't compensate. In most cases it's working for the good cause, which is to decentralize the crypto ecosystem, but if it's not generating you any income, you won't be going full at it. It will remain a side project that you every now and then allocate some time to.

I'm pretty sure that if decentralized exchanges were rewarding, the development and usage would be at an all time high a couple of years ago already. We right now would poop on all these KYC/AML hungry exchanges, but instead, we're still tied to them.

We have to look at where the main source of demand is coming from, and by looking into that, it's safe to say that Ethereum has been the most GPU driven coin in this whole space.

If we go a bit further than that, then the following things have to be taken into consideration when it comes to Ethereum;

# block subsidy reduction.
# the transitioning into a POS network.

Depending on which happens first, this will guaranteed result in less miner demand, especially with how Ethereum won't be scaling up any time soon and thus there is no reason for the price to compensate reduction in block subsidy. Ethereum's hashrate has taken a dive and I don't think it will stop any time soon.

Either way, once Ethereum is full POS, the global demand of GPU's will sink down with at least 50% which is an advantageous event for all non crypto users of GPU's. There is no way the current number of GPU's put to work to mine Ethereum can be put to work to mine other coins profitably. They will end up on the market eventually.

That's not all, what if other GPU coins think it's good to transition into a POS network as well after Ethereum's successful switch?

That would be great fun.

Roger; BCash is the best form of crypto cash, it's more reliable than BTC, XRP, ETH and you name it.

Vitalik; Roger, I fully agree with you, let me go in depth about why Ether can't work as cash.

Jimmy; Hey, wasn't it my time to talk now?

---

I came across another debate today. While it was semi awkward, I actually enjoyed the dog fight (link) between Roger Ver and Tone Vays. Tone brought up some decent points that Roger couldn't come up with. Roger was yet again busy explaining why it's important to read economics books.

@Sutters Mill,

You are desperately trying to discredit Bitcoin and praise other altcoins as if they are anything special. Perhaps you're on the wrong part of the forum man.

Bitcoin a horrible store of value?

Values as per the 10th of September 2017;

Bitcoin $4083
Ethereum $281
XRP $0.20
BCash $515

Values as per today;

Bitcoin $6250
Ethereum $170
XRP $0.25
BCash $420

It's not Bitcoin's fault that people buy in at peak levels. Blame people for that.

I'm not going to waste another second on you.

Perhaps you need to open your eyes. Did you ever attempt to use Ethereum?

And take away Bitcoin's payment system? Why would anyone discard an aspect of Bitcoin that's actually being used?

Bitcoin is the reserve currency of the whole crypto industry. It's actually being used as means of exchange. It's being used as store of value. Bitcoin is the sole reason altcoins have an indication of value at all. If Bitcoin wasn't used as benchmark, Ethereum and all other coins would be valued at least 75% below their latest exchange rate.

Ethereum has nothing other than speculation to back it.

ICO's are what made its price explode in 2017, and ICO's are causing its price to implode right now. As for the smart contracts, it's just a bunch of utter nonsense. If you look at the distrubution of use on the Ethereum platform, then it's 95% fraud and speculation, and 5% actual use. 5% actual use in no shape or form is enough to have Ether be worth even $100 per token.

In the end, projects operating on top of Ethereum can't pay their bills in Ether. They need cold hard fiat in order to operate. Ethereum is going down quite fast, but it's nothing to be surprised about. I think it will bounce back up to a certain degree eventually, but it will be very hard to gain back its previous dominance with other platforms being around, which at the same time are 100-1000x more scalable. Sorry Ether, you failed. Vitalik doesn't even care.

You're totally right, but he's obviously referring to mobile wallet clients or some other web based service since most rookies always go for these at the start of their journey. In other words, OP, if you read this, please point out that you are referring to third party clients and wallet services in that specific case. Perhaps it's also good to point out that it's way better if people use wallet clients that generate private keys locally instead of having a third party do it for you.

Let's help him improve where needed.

I like his attempt to at least point out some technical advantages instead of being solely focused on the speculative side.

I'm somewhat on the same side, and it could even be that current "lower" levels have calculated bad SEC news in already, and thus we might not see any sales at all. If the price doesn't go up in the runup to the announcement this month, which means that the ETF announcement has no relevance anymore, then it's probably safe to say that the aforementioned applies.

My initial plan was to open a short position just before the SEC deadline, but if the market doesn't react I'm no longer doing it since there is too much risk attached at that point. I only strike when the risk reward ratios are favoring a potentially positive outcome for me, and right now it's not looking all too good.

I'm a bit on two sides.

One side says it's your own fault and there are consequences attached to everything you do, especially if you invest in utter shitcoins.

The other side does feel sorry for people, especially with how most of them just try to improve their financial position in life.

People should never forget that there is only one single coin with fundamental value, and that's Bitcoin. As long as you money sits in Bitcoin, you'll eventually see your paper losses turn into paper profits. It only requires patience, and it's surely difficult for people to have patience during a longer term bear market, especially if they have invested money that's not meant for investment purposes, but you don't lose as long as you aren't selling.

Stop investing in shitcoins and stick to the Gold standard called Bitcoin. Stop supporting fraud and schemes.

That's indeed very low, especially when you take into consideration that we by now could have been hovering around 75% at the very minimum. From where we are today, we can gain at least 50% more throughput and thus get the median fees to tank even further. Ideally, the fees per one input>output transaction would be $0.01-$0.03 with 75% Segwit adoption.

If clients learn to seperate spam transactions from 'real world' transactions (and thus not base transaction fees blatantly on the number of mempool transactions and MB weight) we can get the fees to hover firmly around $0.01 without needing to scale over 1MB per block, but we have some time for that to catch up.

It's all due to companies such as Blockchain that there hasn't been much growth in that regard, because these companies are responsible for a lot network traffic.