And the sun is hot.

Bitcoin has been volatile all along and it will remain so until the market expands.  If ever the US and others have ETF type products that bring in hundreds of billions of dollars (or euros etc) to the market that will help bring stability since it will allow large amounts of capital already in the capital markets to enter (and exit) bitcoin without having to use external exchanges.  

While the market is large right now compared to 10 years ago or 5 years ago, it is still not large enough with enough large players to be stable.

The halving is coming. Hopefully 6-8 weeks before that things start looking up for virus related news and the combination could be tremendous. The virus fight is key though.

In the long run, bitcoin is and will become a safe haven.  Whether it is for any particular entry point in any particular geographic location for any particular holding period, that is a different question entirely.  If you purchased in December 2017 from Europe or the US, then it didn't (yet) preserve your capital.  If you purchase in December 2017 from Venezuela or someplace like that, then it did most definitely preserve a lot of your capital compared to holding your local currency.

Without a lot of additional information such as when one purchased, where one was when one purchased, and the timeframe that one intends to use it to protect one's value, the equation is somewhat meaningless.  If you mined in 2010 and 2011, it has been a great safe haven.

Yes. How could anyone think that it’s not? If they can get 100% return they would just borrow the money from someone. And yet I’m sure there are plenty of people who will put money in and then complain later.

There are plenty of venture capitalists who would gladly lend them money. Family and friends etc

"Account"?  What account are you talking about?   Are you talking about an account on an exchange?  An account on your computer?  

I don't have a bitcoin "account".  I have an offline wallet.

The best way to protect your bitcoin is cold storage except for what you intend to use immediately.

I agree with you, short term, cash is fine, but not long term.  As far as whether bitcoin would thrive, I think a lot depends on uptake.  Every year with more people holding it as a safe haven, and particularly this year with the new supply halving, bitcoin becomes more and more a tool to protect one's wealth from authoritarians the world over who will use any means possible to obtain someone else's wealth.

Also to point out here, that there are 80k *known* infected. 

In all likelihood that is way underestimating the actual number.  In the US for example, I suspect it will get into the thousands over the next week or two given that now they are ramping up testing whereas before it was very limited.  So it will in all likelihood show a big increase in the number of people infected, it will only be due to testing showing that people are infected.

As far as a vaccine, hopefully it will be 'a few months' but given how slow things go from a testing and regulatory standpoint, it could be 12-18 months.

Exactly, with the "hehehe". 😀  You are right, with perfect 20/20 foresight, many things can be a safe haven since one always knows what's coming.  😀

As far as valuing it, true, it isn't perfect, but it is the main option right now. Although a btc/gold pair wouldn't be bad.  One key difference right now is, of course, the fact that over the long term such as several decades, fiat loses a tremendous amount of value/purchasing power, whereas bitcoin has gained it over the last ten years.  Fiat is like a slow leak of air from a tire.  Bitcoin has been a rapidly inflating tire with some intervening ups and downs in value aka pressure.

I do keep most things invested pretty much continuously though since my crystal ball isn't working well for the short term, but has a good track record for longer term trends.

Coronavirus, and Bernie were the big fears last week!  Anyone who thinks cash or bonds are a safe Haven is ignoring the effect of inflation which will destroy all their value over time.

Bitcoin could be safe from Bernie, if one needs to get out from socialism's capital controls to somewhere that is compatible with freedom, not slavery.

There were people saying very similar things here and on slashdot in July 2010 when I first read about it.  Anyone who ignored them and mined (or later bought) has done very well.

Gold was down this week just as was bitcoin. Is gold not a store of value?   Watch them over the course of years, not days, weeks or even months.

Nothing has failed except people not understanding or at least having patience.

Exactly this.  Just because 8000 years ago 100% of people believed the earth was flat, did make it so.  Just because 1000 years ago everyone believed "heavier than air flight was impossible" didn't make it true.  Statistics about people's beliefs do not change any facts.  Just as in September 2019 if 49% of people think a recession will occur with 6 months (for example) doesn't mean it will.  

As he said, bitcoin transactions NEVER depend on an exchange.  Sure if you want to purchase bitcoin, one may need an exchange.

Is it a safe haven?  Certainly more so than fiat.

Just a bunch of nonsense.

Crack cocaine can kill, not to mention tainted cocaine can and does kill.  I would wonder about the people making it, what if they screw up?  What if the dealer cuts it with something lethal?   It just isn't worth the risk to me to do any of this stuff.  (By the way, to one of the people above, I don't touch anything either - clean living.  No alcohol or drugs etc.  I enjoy my life without needing any of them.)

Centralized crypto backed by a physical asset that can be seized? What’s the point?  I’ll answer that question - I think the point is to capitalize on buzzwords and control their citizens.

My thoughts are he is mistaken since he doesn't understand how a POW coin secures the entire chain. The effort of POW secures every portion of the chain.  People who argue otherwise don't understand the basics of bitcoin and the economics upon which it is based.

It is like saying "gold has no value" or "<name your fiat currency> has no value."  In some respects that is true.  If you were on an island alone, none of them, bitcoin, gold, the Euro/Dollar etc would have no value.  However they all have value based on the fact that other people know that different people will exchange them for something of use to you - food, shelter, medical care, water, computers, TV, movies etc.

Does skin color matter?  What about green-eyed Americans?  Blue-eyed Americans?  Blond Americans?  Brunette Americans?  Grey-haired Americans?  Anyone can use bitcoin.  Everyone should use bitcoin, regardless of irrelevant factors like skin color to protect themselves from the statist authoritarians who are ascendant in the US Democrat party.

Oh, and "African-American" is a racist term, invented by the southern Democrat majority in the 1960s and 1970s in order to delegitimize black Americans to make them seem only half American, not full American.  At least per various law schools in the US.  So, you probably don't want to use that term.

"a blockchain is added to a bitcoin blockchain" and other errors.

Lol.  My thoughts are that this graphic is laughable.

It is almost as if someone who didn't know what they were talking about put it together.

He may have been pro-bitcoin in the sense that he'd take donations in it, but he was anything but "pro" the sentiments behind bitcoin.  As a leftwing authoritarian statist, the goals of bitcoin taking power from the government entities and elites who control the world monetary system and who encourage an inflationary currency are the antithesis of bitcoin.  Likewise, he and his cohorts that he will support in the democrat primary are of the mindset of wanting to know everything that everyone does and so would be at odds with any privacy protections coming to cryptos.  And don't forget the UBI, insanity if you care about freedom.

Bitcoin is anti-elites and not inflationary at all eventually and beginning in May, even less inflationary that now.  It is decentralized instead of centralized like the policies that he espouses and it is incompatible with a centralized, all-controlling government which he advocates.

So while it is always too bad when someone who is somewhat pro-bitcoin even if only accepting donations in it, is out, his philosophy would have been completely at odds, diametrically opposed to bitcoin's uses if he had been elected.

There are people who are pro-bitcoin from a philosophical standpoint, such as Ron Paul or Rand Paul, plus much of the House Freedom caucus, but likewise there are plenty of people in DC who hate everything that bitcoin could accomplish because it will impact their power and consequently the amount of money they can make selling that power.

A constitutional, representative republic is much preferred where the wolves are not legally allowed to vote to have the sheep for dinner even if it is 999 wolves and 1 sheep.   The US Founders, Alexis de Tocqueville and many other people have recognized why democracy is a bad idea, and anyone who has read history should understand it.  It is one reason why the US has the electoral college among other things.  It is another reason why the sheep in the US are allowed to be armed.  So the power-hungry wolves can't vote the sheep into slavery.  After all, the Democrat slave owners in the old Southern US States were a democracy and I doubt anyone with any sense would argue that the slaves did not deserve protection.


Check out Federalist 51 for example:
https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/the-federalist-papers/federalist-papers-no-51/

Democracy is a tyranny of the majority and hence should not be the goal of anyone concerned with liberty. I was in Miami at the time and had friends from Venezuela who used to come and visit.  They thought no one would vote themselves into slavery and destruction.  They were wrong.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner as someone once said.

You are right. The lure of "free" stuff is extremely strong.  The people voting for them don't seem to realize that nothing is free and they are selling themselves and their progeny to these people, and trading their liberty and everyone's liberty in return for a few pieces of silver.  Once it is done it is extremely difficult to go back to freedom. You may be able to vote yourself into the slavery of socialism, but you can only fight your way out.

Look at Venezuela.  The richest country in South America 25 years ago with a ton of oil riches. They elected a socialist who promised "free" stuff to the people and promised to "equalize" incomes and wealth. He succeeded, he just equalized them down to a dollar or two per month.

People who think it can't happen somewhere are naive.  A power hungry group can seize power and eviscerate the constitutional protections over a short (or long) period of time. The left can play a long game, look at how FDR in the US undermined the constitution in order to advance his power and how leftist presidents since then have built upon that.

A Sanders with a Congress of like mind could easily take it to the extreme where there would be no return.  The courts would be of little use, look at how FDR threatened to pack the US Supreme Court and then, suddenly, got his way on the issues of the day.