People seem to keep hoping for the currency to appreciate in value when the USD is potentially on a run that repeats the prosperity of the 1980s. That's not going to happen.
At the same time, why does BTC even need to trade significantly higher than its current price. If it wants to function as a currency, why should it be dislocated with such magnitude from other currencies?
It doesn't work like that. BTC is more like a stock than a traditional currency. BTC can reach 1 million per coin and perfectly function. The idea that being far from the price of other currencies is somehow not good is nonsense. More demand and less total supply available = higher price, period. It's as simple as that. |
|
|
|
I think we conquered this idea a long time ago. Move forwards not backwards guys
This. It's absolutely nonsense to consider barter economy again. There isn't a single thing that's better about barter economy than monetary economy. We just didn't had no other options back then but bartering, until we came up with the idea of money. |
|
|
|
Yeah USA going to win this one again...
One language for all, one currency for all. The alternative was "Euro" against "USD" but Europeans f**ked it up with Greece crisis. (and spain will be following probably)
And China? China is in another world dude. No one would want to go there. So basically China is worthless to most people.
Euro could never provide a strong fight against dollar, despite of whatever capital strength they possess because it takes social and political capabilities to back a strong currency, not just missiles. Spain is not going to end like Greece anytime soon, they've made the most recovery from their crisis in the whole euro zone circle. Also, China is not worthless, the whole world relies on it for manufacturing their products and provide the cheapest human resources. That recovery is a bubbled one. It's based on precarious labor, low quality and temporal jobs that pay next to peanuts. The spaniards are holding without riots because they are living off under the table work and off grandparent's welfare. You are deluded if you think its getting any better for them. My family lives in Spain and they told me everything which happens there, I am more informed about the place than you are. I can assume you don't live there because you're one of those people who reads a conspiracy theory over the internet and totally believes it. I'm anything but deluded, Spain might not be completely recovery free but they are doing so much better than what I think they would be like. I have some friends there and everyone is struggling to get a job and the jobs they get are always underpaid and chances are they are not full time jobs. I agree that there is some recovery but he isn't wrong on what he said, the jobs aren't decent enough and I fail to see how it will get any better. It seems they are stuck in perpetual austerity being Troika's bitch just like all southern european countries are. |
|
|
|
Conventional theories of money assume that money is backed by precious metal (the theory known as bullionism) or by the state (chartalism) but Bitcoin is backed by neither. Economists also often define money as anything that serves as a medium of exchange, but Bitcoin isn't much good at that either (so far, at least). So does that mean Bitcoin is not money, or is the problem with these theories? I have posted a paper on this question here, comments/responses appreciated: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2624371How Bitcoin isn't good as somethng that serves as a medium of exchange? it's the best ever. The fact we lack merchants isn't Bitcoin fault, it's people being idiot's fault. It will take time for merchants to spread, maybe one or two decades. Bitcoin doesn't need anything physical to be backed with, scarcity has now been achieved digitally. I know the grandpas out there struggle to get this one. |
|
|
|
When there are millions and billions of dollars invested 'good enough' suddenly sounds like a very compelling proposition.
These people who love to wheel out the myspace/facebook comparison seem to forget that it cost nothing to switch, and if there was a technical failure because the new system was unproven the only thing you'd lose would be your album of burger shot selfies.
You can replicate the blockchain a trillion times a day. You can't replicate the trust that it's still in the process of earning.
Ineed good enough is all that matters. Does anyone remember the early days of the internet and the alternatives to the tcp/ip protocol? some said it wasnt the best technology, some said it will never scale, but it obviously did and bitcoin is exactly the same situation again, its so clear to anyone that has been on the internet since 1985. |
|
|
|
|
I think "trustless" is not a valid term to use. The word trustless implies no trust at all, when we are trusting the network itself, we are are trusting the network will not screw us over like centralization does. Sure it's a bit picky of an observation but i think there's something that isn't 100% accurate about what the word trustless really tries to convey in this context.
|
|
|
|
Spy on me how?
BTC -> Nicehash (let say) -> Hash Seller -> Pointed at anonymous url routing to a private pool or full node of yours-> Paid in freshly generated coins to a completely unrelated wallet/coin. You can then exchange that to whatever you want or just spend it.
There are segments of tracability, which are hard to follow, then the Seller isint connected to your IP in any way at any time. You could do this from any connection and anywhere in the world (with internet).
I am not even sure its necessary to obfuscate the target pool as i am not sure there even is a way for to track who found a block for most coins anyways.
How are you exactly going to exchange the Bitcoins into fiat without getting traced? It's easy to stay anonymous within crypto, but not as soon as you start exchanging in fiat. In fact I would go as far as to say that it's impossible to do it anonymously. |
|
|
|
This is a quote from Satoshi himself: Feb. 14, 2010: I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume.
He is basically saying that in 2020, then will you either be rich or have nothing. So we'll be rich, because at this point the network effect of Bitcoin is way too strong to ever disappear. Im sorry for the haters. What can I say? get on this train before it's too late, otherwise it may be the decision that you regret the most making in your entire life and beyond. Just owning 1 BTC should be mandatory in 2015. |
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately it will take a couple years more of crisis for something to happen. People is not going to care if the system we live under is complete nonsense as long as they can pay for their starbucks coffee and buy the new xbox from wallmart. As long as everything seems normal under the surface things will not change. Once this system of infinite debt starts crumbling and people start researching for alternatives then anyone holding 1 BTC will be the new 1% and so be it.
|
|
|
|
Your theory is very exciting, and I really wish that happens soon. I think there are certain social factors and economical factors in a few countries withing a few people which limit the accessibility of bitcoin. once that problem is overcome, there can be more concentration as to increasing use of bitcoin around us and educating about bitcoin to substantially multiply its use which will in the end benefit bitcoin users.
It's bound to happen sooner or later. All the indicators are aiming for a total fiat collapse and the scam will be finally unveiled. If we can get through the blocksize crisis thing and start planning things for the next 20 years to scale up the system we'll get there. Bitcoin is the only thing that can save us from failing into the same traps from the past, this is bigger than most here realize. |
|
|
|
|
Economy is a result of a necessity. At the beginning we had barter system, once humans expanded and conquered earth, we needed something. Money is simply a token that says you can buy this or that, you owe me this or that. That's all. It's just a necessity to keep things in order. Of course people will keep taking advantage of each other with or without money, but it's better than total chaos.
|
|
|
|
if 21 million users meant a BTC value of 160,000, that would imply that the average btc owner has 160k in bitcoins.
Is that realistic? I don't think so. What's a more realistic number? Probably somewhere around 1,000-2,000. So that's what the price will stabilize at, assuming the number of users stay at 21 million long enough for stabilization, but not so long that bitcoin stagnates and becomes irrelevant.
But if it was during a huge pump, perhaps because some garage geniuses created killer apps for bitcoin, then it could go an order of magnitude higher.
The problem is: what do you mean by realistic? Maybe in 2011 people bought or mined Bitcoin in hope to have, one day, 10$ per Bitcoin. Now they have 270$ per Bitcoin. Now, if you think that in a not too far future Bitcoin will see a future of in increased market request, price will rise accordingly. There's no escape to that. So yes, now your BTC values around 270$, but while the system gains reputation around the world, price will rise. And nobody can know how much it will end up reaching. Exactly, we can't talk about what is or isn't realistic when brand new technology that can discover we can do now things we didn't even thought about before. The price is indeed invaluable. If you told anyone back in 2009 that BTC would reach 100 you would be deemed mentally insane. Imagine if you said 1000, or higher than gold. Thing is, the future is an white paper not written yet, anything is possible. |
|
|
|
|
I like the idea of a blocksize that keeps increased with time since it allows planning, but then again, how can we know that Bitcoin will not suddenly become hugely mainstream and it's usage explodes in a very short period of time, requiring a bigger blocksize than what was originally planned? we can never know when something goes viral, i dont think increment in usage can be widely rendered in a nice graph. Ideally this should be dynamic. Im not sure thats possible tho.
|
|
|
|
From my point of view, the future is very optimistic.
yeah i hope so. optimistic and dynamic  As bitcoin users we have to be optimistic and support bitcoins. No matter what people spread rumors related to bitcoins. We have faith in bitcoin that it can earn us best profit in the coming future. As the mass adoption comes into play, we would see the difference in the value of bitcoins, and surely it would hit the mainstream in coming future. When you aren't feeling optimistic you only need to watch one of Andreas Antonopolous lectures. He's got the knowledge and he's got the way to motivate people. You always learn something new, it's a good way to keep up to date with Bitcoin news without having to read any website. |
|
|
|
|
They don't need to create anything. The USD is already a virtual coin. Cash is only 2% of total wealth in dollars (same goes for any other big fiats out there). So basically what you are dealing with is numbers in a computer screen, there's absolutely nothing that backs it up.
Soon the % of this virtual coin will be 100% with 0 cash because physical cash is going to dissapear in the next 10 years. Here is where there is hope that people will get the scam that fiat is and hop on Bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
|
I got into Bitcoin with the clear mindset of never getting into debt and forgetting any debt based business. The last thing I want near me is a debit card that has Bitcoin on it. Debit cards are like drugs, you want to stay away from it or you will become a Bitcoin shopping addict.
|
|
|
|
I'm still of the opinion that someone is doing it because it's profitable.
And if it's profitable, they won't stop. Ever.
I fail to understand how attacking the network with spam is profitable in any way. Anyone cares to elaborate on this hypothesis? The only way I see this being profitable is if you were spamming a website with every transaction as some sort of massive advertisement but it's not the case, and everyone would hate you anyway. |
|
|
|
What will be the value of one Bitcoin when the number of users (people that will want to use Bitcoin) will hit 21 millions?
At this point, if each user wanted to have 1 Bitcoin, will have to pay a certain number of $ or € or Y, whatever. I'm going with $ just because it's the most used around the world.
How many $ do you think that person, the n. 21 millionth, who wants to buy 1 BTC will have to pay to obtain it?
My wild guess is: 160000 $.
A lot more than we thing probably. Always take into account there are way less coins available than 21 million, a ton of them are lost forever, and a lot more aren't even mined yet, so if that threshold is surpassed the price goes higher. I cant honestly give you an exact number. I like the Xapo's CEO prediction: between 500.000 and 1 MM dollars. Not to forget Satoshi's coins, which I think will never be used. 21 million users is not too outrageous. It is just 2% of facebook's active users. I would say $10k will be breached when this happens. Once you are aware that Bitcoin exists something enters your mind: You are on a never ending battle to obtain at least 1 full BTC. I think every single person that is supportive of BTC owns or is on a mission to obtain at least one. If 21 million have that mindset, the price would explode. |
|
|
|
Here's a great graphic that lets you visualize the future scalability of bitcoin if (hopefully) we get our shit together and start raising the blocksize in time to not bloat the network and start challenging the banksters and their centralized business and potentially ruin them by deprecating them:  |
|
|
|
|
I downloaded the blockchain today from scratch because i had some annoying problem, it took ages but I noticed it was extremely slow since the spam tests started. Is it because blocks contain more transactions or something? It started being really slower at "10 weeks ago". (using core)
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
