I don't really know

As I'm not involved in this kind of activity so I can't give any definitive conclusion. But I still can't see how it can possibly exist on mass scale (lending business) other than peer-to-peer loans between trusted parties (just simple logic)

Anyway, there's a board here which is just about that thing. As I also said, I don't go there (people don't go to the Lending section at Bitcointalk), though I see now and then someone being painted red for not returning a cryptocurrency loan. In this way, there might be some form of life on this planet, after all

Technically, that was nothing of the ordinary

It seems fantastic to us because we were stagnating for nearly two months in a pretty tight range, so a relatively small burst looks to us as something big and impressive. But almost entire 2018 (not even speaking of 2017) consisted of such or bigger price action. On the other hand, if we continue to stagnate further (not entirely impossible), this is going to be our new reality and we should get used to it (and make do with what we got)

In fact, it is not difficult at all

They don't even have to code anything themselves, apart from the frontend which would allow their buyers to choose a payment method. But they likely already have it anyway as there are many payment options available even without cryptocurrencies in mind (e.g. PayPal, bank cards, cash, etc). Technically, it all comes down to installing a third party plugin, the one supplied by the payment processor which makes cryptocurrency payments possible. And there are no cryptocurrency related risks for merchants with this approach

I didn't mean you personally, of course

I meant a lender, it is a figure of speech basically. But that's the problem with online lending, i.e. your collateral should be liquid. It is not like you come to a bank for a loan and can offer real estate as a collateral. Not very liquid but that makes sense as the bank is in no hurry to get rid of it at whatever price (provided it has a price)

In other words, what can you offer as a collateral for an online loan other than your good name (read, you should already be trusted)? A ton of shitcoins? And how would that be different from just selling them?

Well, I expected something like that

The same approach is used with ZCash if I'm not mistaken, where some share of the block reward goes right into the wallets of primary investors in this coin (doesn't look like ZCash is extremely popular though). In this manner, it can be said that betting should help promote the use of the underlying coin (which is called BetKings, KNG for short). So, technically, it is yet another shitcoin that you are supposed to buy in order to bet with it, a bet coin of sorts. But we already have Dogecoin which fits perfectly here, so why all the fuss really?

Not gonna work out

Well, it could actually work out if we got back to the state we had been in like 16-17th centuries (or even before that). Conspiracy theories aside, the major reason why governments dismantled gold backup of fiat currencies was because it had been a constant pain in the ass in the form of monetary imbalances which were caused by the rapid expansion of the world economy due to Industrial Revolutions (definitely not a bad thing on its own)

It had started to be acutely felt in the second half of the 19th century and ultimately led to the Great Depression of 1929 (with a train of minor crises before 1929). The Nixon shock of 1973 was sort of official divorce, but we could safely claim that gold and dollar parted their ways as early as 1933 after Franklin Roosevelt had signed his famous Executive Order 6102. In other countries the separation occurred even earlier

I never understood that thing

If you are asking for collateral why would then a borrower care about taking a loan in the first place if he could just spend that collateral directly (and without paying interest at that)? So it all comes down to trust (read, no valid collateral for you) but when online you are expected not to trust anyone by default. Yeah, there is a lending section on the forum (or how it is called correctly, dunno), but I even fear to look into there (as it's likely bad for karma)

As I got it, OP is not affiliated with the site

But no fees is definitely a red flag (yes, I checked with the site and it states exactly that). Really, why would anyone want to offer a free lunch (well, a free betting opportunity)? How are they going to earn then unless there are some hidden fees involved? It doesn't look like they are offering a web interface at all (which is a must-have these days), but they have a desktop wallet which you should download and install. So don't be surprised if there is some nasty code in it eagerly looking to steal your precious coins

There's a better strategy

And it is the only one which actually contributes to Bitcoin's long-term success, the one in which you can participate in person. I refer to using bitcoins (or any other cryptocurrency, for that matter) in real life like paying for things and services. Yes, I know that not too many merchants currently accept crypto, but that's so primarily because of us who are not very much inclined overall to part with their precious coins. Just in case, I do spend a certain amount of crypto personally, so it is not just about speculation and profiteering to me

Well, your point is not quite correct either

As you seem to forget that miners are mining for a profit, while the cost of mining rigs is fixed. It means that just like with traders they have a breakeven point, and the longer they mine the closer they get to it (provided they are mining for a profit, of course). So in due course their profits start to exceed both the operating costs (i.e. electricity costs) and the cost of invested capital (i.e. the costs of equipment). From then on the cost of equipment becomes irrelevant apart from what they could sell their mining rigs for, naturally (but this works in their favor typically)

And whether it will happen at all

Though I agree that it is not a good idea to "spread awareness and properly educate the public of what Bitcoin is" because in real life it will most likely come down to persuading people that Bitcoin is worth investing in (as its real use still sucks). But if someone gets convinced after all and then price goes against them, it is going to backfire massively (with all kinds of accusations following). So let's allow Bitcoin to do its thing on its own as everyone here is on their own (at least, as far as investing in cryptocurrencies is concerned)

That's what I'm telling

It all depends on what kind of regulation we are talking about. If this regulation is about making our lives easier (read, it is overall in favor of Bitcoin), then it is going to help Bitcoin, as simple as it gets. But if it is more about putting grit in the Bitcoin "dream" machine, then such regulation will hurt cryptocurrencies (just as simple). The days when regulations didn't mean anything (like in 2011 when Bitcoin was virtually unknown) are long gone

I have to disagree with this perspective

First of all, we simply can't take 2011 and claim it was the biggest and baddest bubble of all so far. The reason should be obvious. Back then there was no Bitcoin market as such, so it is not quite correct to talk about a bubble. In other words, price could be any as it didn't have any meaning yet across whatever markets existed back in the day

Second, you don't specify what kind of regulation you are talking about. For example, if Bitcoin is universally regulated anywhere close to how it is done in Japan (Bitcoin being legally equal to a foreign currency there), that would most definitely contribute to Bitcoin value. To deny this would amount to being in denial

Technically, it is not down

It is still hovering well over 3800 at Bitfinex and if this support level stands, it may be a good starting point for further rise. One of the telling signs of a nascent bull market is higher highs as well as higher lows. We had already seen a higher high a couple days ago, while what we see now could very well count as a higher low. If anything, in a week's time it will be clear if it was a bull trap to fall into or actually a bull springboard to jump above

I agree with every word said

And especially with the corruption part as in most cases it is not about regulations at all. These issues (pollution, etc) have been properly studied during the last few decades (indeed, there are still open questions like global warming) and regulations are already in place as the long-term consequences of environmental damage have been revealed (or have revealed themselves)

So it is not about regulations as such but rather about making corporations follow them. And this is where things may get nasty as some corporations can be more equal than others

If it is going to last another decade or two, then it doesn't really matter

Though I feel certain that it will last for longer, much longer, while the American dollar will be the last to bite the dust and kick the bucket. If this scam has been going on for years, why did it not end already? Or maybe, they are in fact doing everything right after all? If they are pumping out money like there's no tomorrow, we should expect at least 2-digit inflation rates, right? But inflation in the US has been one of the lowest in the world in the last years. How come?

Just getting enough referrals is not enough (pardon the pun)

They should also be doing something like rolling, dicing, etc to actually bring you dough. Out of my 123 referrals only a couple has been active recently, and I expect it to be no different on average from other folks having so many (or even more). If you want to make money through them, you should always be devising new methods of attracting a fresh flock of referrals as there is tough competition in this field (apart from people going away constantly)

People are still massively confused about scarcity and how it works

I explained it a few times but it seems to be about right time to repeat the lesson. Bitcoin's yearly supply being less than gold's doesn't in the least mean that Bitcoin is more scarce than gold (the opposite can also turn out to be true, just in case). Any such figures are meaningless because there is no scarcity on its own as it should always relate to something, most commonly to some group of people (or the whole world population)

In this way, Bitcoin may already be more scarce than gold (say, per dollar worth per capita). I don't know if it actually is but you can always check that yourself. And while we are at it, I think it is correctly called supply, not emission. Are you coming from Slavic languages? Just curious

This doesn't even count as an assumption

I'd rather say it is pure speculation (even a conjecture of sorts). How come? There is simple logic why it is highly unlikely (i.e. people moving from Bitcoin to gold). Gold and Bitcoin lie at the two opposite ends of the investment "stick" (or stack), so to speak. Gold is for those who want to preserve their wealth, while Bitcoin is for those who want to multiply it fast ("get rich quick")

In simple terms, there is no way there can be a direct transition en masse between the two as there are many intermediate stages in between (like stocks, bonds, currencies, etc), which are less volatile than Bitcoin but still not quite on par with gold. So you would actually expect people to use these assets before moving to gold in the end

Technically, I agree with this (to a degree)

Altcoins pick up where Bitcoin leaves off. For example, many people after a while become no longer satisfied with the money they make through Bitcoin's volatility (as they say, one leg of mutton helps down another), while altcoins look promising in this regard (whether they actually live up to these promises is another question)

However, I don't see how it disproves my point as people move from Bitcoin to altcoins looking for more profits, and that's exactly what I'm talking about, i.e. without altcoins people would be trading Bitcoin only (note that I don't say whether it would be good or bad)