...Anything less is shitty prison money for slave plantations, even sheeple get that.
You taste like chicken.  ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. |
|
|
|
Please explain to me what the perceived value of Bitcoin is?
Other than being decentralised, frictionless, borderless, non counterfeitable, cryptographically secure and algorithmically scarce? Like Doge clonecoin u mean?  |
|
|
|
...
edit: and if the human race becomes what I hope it can, then we all switch over to TOR + a reliable and fully anonymous coin.
If the human race becomes what I hope it to be, we would need neither TOR nor anonymous coin |
|
|
|
If, by your definition, fiat is fungible until it gets stolen (which is a bit nonsensical), then Bitcoin could be treated similarly: Fungible until stolen. Where's the problem?
That's not what we're talking about. Read the thread more carefully. And tell us how you voted... :-) Perhaps some rest? Your posts are getting that peaked cantankerous vibe one associated with an exhausted mind. Feel free to retract or redraft your post once you're well rested... :-) |
|
|
|
@NotLambchop
But, your opinion seems to be that the protocol/technology is valuable, therefore the coins should also be. When more applications are developed for the blockchain and adoption increases, the more valuable the protocol becomes, the more expensive the coins become.
The blockchain can be duplicated as many times and for as many different applications as need be. Clonecoin. This particular instance of he technology--the Bitcoin blockchain--is no more elegant than a clone, so not particularly valuable beyond its current sunk capital (miners, etc.) & brand recognition. If I said automotive technology is valuable to mankind, would you assume I meant Chevy? |
|
|
|
... Bitcoin the "protocol/technology" in your analogy would be tcp/ip. To my knowledge, no one made a fortune buying "shares of internet."
I am sure many ISP provides made good money selling Internet to the people... Yes, just like I'm sure many exchanges made good money selling you Bitcoin. I'm not suggesting that no one profits from the internet, just that the value of bitcoin (the unit of account) is not the same as the value of the technology. @stefanf: I agree with you, but there's nothing to suggest that today's BTC price reflects the value of the technology. There's even less to suggest that the price would rise. Solving a block must be rewarded for people to continue mining, but there's no reason for the reward to be high if the network's total worth (the profit which could be had by compromising it, etc.) is low. |
|
|
|
The decline in Bitcoin price is intentional manipulation.
...
Strato
 |
|
|
|
You can't compare the internet to Bitcoin. Sure, many people didn't know the use of it 20 years ago. But it was a completely new thing. Bitcoin is money.
Bitcoin is not money just like the internet is not a digital version of USPS... Bitcoin is a protocol/technology. One of its applications is digital cash. Bitcoin the "protocol/technology" in your analogy would be tcp/ip. To my knowledge, no one made a fortune buying "shares of internet." Wrong, many who bought .com domains made a fortune. .com domains have nothing to do with "protocol/technology." See boldface above. |
|
|
|
Bitcoin is a Goldbergian contrivance, at best a cludgy solution to a problem existing only in the minds of a few batty libers. I heartily agree. [bunch complicated stuff attempting to do something which is done much simpler and to everyone's satisfaction already] Goldbergian, yeah. |
|
|
|
...
Back to school kid!
Learn some tact, faggot.  |
|
|
|
How does everyone feel about the B symbol with the two lines through the outside? Can we live with that as our logo?
Yes. Clearly derivative of/has attractive similarities to the iconic $, inspires confidence. |
|
|
|
...Mainstream use of phone started like that yes.... phone technology did not. There was lots of work in infrastructure first, what we now see in bitcoinland. I'm sure with bitcoin it won't take many decades, don"t you think?
Allright, Bitcoin is more useful than the telephone. And the people who got the first phones, the early adopter visionaries, all got filthy rich. You are either really bad at analogies or really good at creating false analogies. You realize that the original analogy is contrived gibberish too, right? Bitcoin is a Goldbergian contrivance, at best a cludgy solution to a problem existing only in the minds of a few batty libers. Which aspect of the telephone is analogous to Bitcoin? The "disruptive technology"? In that case, it's as asinine expecting to profit from buying and hoarding Bitcoin as it is from buying and hoarding telephone sets. The network effect? Sure, but how does it factor in? Can it help us evaluate the soundness of buying and hodling Bitcoin? Would the resulting model be verifiable/falsifiable? If network effect was the dominant factor here, it should be reflected in Bitcoin price. It isn't--the price has been plummeting for close to a year now. Intentional avoidance of inconvenient evidence like this is typical of libber thinking: Latch on to a simple-to-grasp, intuitive analogy, and ignore all IRL data which contradicts it. Again, the network effect is a concept--it's used to illustrate why things happen after they happen. As a model it has no predictive power, it can't tell you that shit will/will not happen. More sophistry and illusion--commit it then to the flames  Stay tasty, earthlings. ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. |
|
|
|
...Mainstream use of phone started like that yes.... phone technology did not. There was lots of work in infrastructure first, what we now see in bitcoinland. I'm sure with bitcoin it won't take many decades, don"t you think?
Allright, Bitcoin is more useful than the telephone. And the people who got the first phones, the early adopter visionaries, all got filthy rich. |
|
|
|
...
Got it. I thought you meant 32hrs when you said 32hrs. My mistake. |
|
|
|
You can't compare the internet to Bitcoin. Sure, many people didn't know the use of it 20 years ago. But it was a completely new thing. Bitcoin is money.
Bitcoin is not money just like the internet is not a digital version of USPS... Bitcoin is a protocol/technology. One of its applications is digital cash. Bitcoin the "protocol/technology" in your analogy would be tcp/ip. To my knowledge, no one made a fortune buying "shares of internet." |
|
|
|
..."Telephones are a pain in the ass to use so why buy one?
If someone has a telephone then fine...its easy as hell to use...But the majority of people on the planet don't have telephones. "
Bitcoin is more like Ham radio in the age of cellphones. If everyone was a ham, there would be no need to pay the phone bill. A bit less convenient than the phone, but think of the benefits!  |
|
|
|
...
You don't have to believe me.
You promised to stop posting if wrong... But don't leave until I had a chance to rub it in your face. Again and again and again  |
|
|
|
The last time it was 377 was at 22:00 on 22Oct14...there is no chance that it will hit that in the next 5 hours.
I meant 1am UK time thats 9 hours  Is my math broken again? |
|
|
|
.. Remember Who Your Enemies Are  ... And get plenty of exercise. Earthling. ~Your Beneficent Reptilian Overlords. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
