 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
Thank you for your thoughtful response.
|
|
|
|
Hello all. So I put a considerable amount of money into ripple yesterday because I got caught up in the hype. After reading some of these posts that say that it all may be a scam, I wish to get them back to BTC. I have sold my ripple but they are still 'stuck' as BTC in ripple's snapswap. I realize that I'm an idiot, but is there a way that I can get my coins back to my BTC wallet?
Like i said you don't really own BTC, you only own a IOU means a certificate which says you own it. It will take time for them to get your BTC but you will get it. Question is on which price. Okay, but as long as I have them converted as BTC into my wallet at ripple, then I should get that exact amount of BTC at some point, correct? |
|
|
|
|
Hello all. So I put a considerable amount of money into ripple yesterday because I got caught up in the hype. After reading some of these posts that say that it all may be a scam, I wish to get them back to BTC. I have sold my ripple but they are still 'stuck' as BTC in ripple's snapswap. I realize that I'm an idiot, but is there a way that I can get my coins back to my BTC wallet?
|
|
|
|
If someone can translate the Chinese forums to see what they are thinking that would be great too. I have a BA in Chinese, but that isn't saying much, especially when dealing with technical topics such as Bitcoin. Unless you have a real Chinese person who has volunteered to do your bidding then I would be happy try to translate and then paste into the Chinese forum tomorrow. Your questions are my questions and it sucks having the language barrier. |
|
|
|
No, this is how you bootstrap a currency without concentrating all the wealth in a few hands. From an investing standpoint, which is where I am, it doesn't matter why or how a currency is maintained, all that matters is the bottom line cost. Centralized, decentralized, all things considered, which is the cheaper way to do business? That is my question. To simplify things, lets imagine that we are in 2040 and that there are no more Bitcoins entering the market. Will the market cost of solving these algorithms on the Bitcoin network be less than that of centralized systems doing the same work? I honestly don't know but the next question to ask is this: As transaction volume goes up on the BTC network, is the average transaction cost (after 2040) going to look like a negative exponential curve, will it be linear, or will it be exponential? Would love to hear anyone's response on this one. ** On the other hand when looking at CC's, will fraud become more or less prevalent in the future? I read that fraud prevention accounts for 40% of CC company costs. If fraud declines because cyber security improves over time, or if the general population becomes more educated on identity protection, then this will lower the cost of CC transaction fees. Other things to consider are: Electricity cost in the future, precious metal costs in the future, Moore's law, and open internet to name a few. BTC is more sensitive to these variables than conventional means of transaction processing. P.S. FYI those figures are well-known to be overstated because miners don't use equipment they calculate for. Blockchain should update for the efficiency of ASICs The chart shows BTC payout per volume, I don't see how an increase in efficiency would change anything on this chart. To my understanding it is simply 3600/daily volume. Please explain. ** I have read a bit on how the blockchain works and how solving these algorithms works, but I do not know what determines increase or decrease in complexity of these algorithms, particularly how the difficulty is expected to change over time per transaction |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the serious response. I'll mull it over and come back tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
I own Bitcoin, idiot. Thanks for addressing the substance of my post though. Just kidding, you didn't. Anyone else here want to have a real discussion? I simply posted something that has been going through my mind for the last couple of weeks and I can't get over it. I am a relentless doubter, even if I want to believe in something. It is called critical thinking. Go join the legion of bitcoin zombies here, the grown-ups are having a discussion.
Certainly sounds adult of you. Your phrasing, tone, and attitude tell all. You might own some bitcoin. If you do it's because you think you are getting rich quick off suckers. That's okay, because Bitcoin is useful for those people too. It's a positive-sum game. Even with your attitude, the economy is better than if you behaved the same in the old-world monetary system. This is the other key difference: Some folks here are firm economic atheists. They will try very hard to convert you to Bitcoin. Your argument will, if unchecked, devolve into a religious debate between atheists and monotheists. You're both theists. I'm agnostic. I'm pretty sure I'm right, and I'm going to use logic and reason and numbers to back that up. But in the end, the game theory of it also says that if I'm right, it doesn't matter if there are few staunch monotheistic folks running about. The science is unaffected, and eventually you'll catch up, or perish wasting your life on a false god rather than improving humanity. What is your argument, then? It looks to me like you have decided to turn a blind eye to years of theory, much of it documented in this very forum. You certainly aren't asking anything new. Thanks for all of those ten cent words, you are really impressing me. Could you do me a favor though and address my post about CC fees, BTC fees, and hidden costs? Maybe I'm double counting something? Maybe the added supply of BTC doesn't have as harsh affect on the market as I am seeing? Give me something that has math please. Thanks for the responses. So we all agree that merchants will have to incentivize people to use BTC then? Not as sweet of a deal as it originally sounded for merchants, but overall it appears as though they can still save a percentage point or two overall. So far... Consider this: Bloomberg ran an interesting article the other day that pointed to the fact that the BTC network pays for itself by releasing a constant supply of coins into the market (to miners) which acts to constantly drive the price of BTC down. This amounts to approximately 3.9% at current volumes. ** This percentage will surely go down with an increase in volume and decrease in inflation over time, but still in my opinion, AT BEST it will be 1.5% over the next eight years or so. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-02/bitcoin-is-an-expensive-way-to-pay-for-stuff.htmlSo we have we have 1% deposit fee onto the consumer, and 2-3% onto the merchant as an "incentive fee" in order to compete with CC companies. This averages out to 1.5-2% sum fee to both parties collectively. Put this on top of the 1.5(ideal)-3.9%(actual) fee exacted upon the markets by the maintenace of the BTC network, and we have a total of 3-5.9% overall cost to do business in BTC. Getting expensive. Would love to hear any and all responses. Thanks for your time. ** You can calculate this fee by taking daily bitcoins released (3600) and dividing it by the total daily volume in BTC. See this chart: https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction-percent |
|
|
|
Beats in what way? It looks like volume-wise CC wins. The usage vs revenue only points to the fact that BTC users are spending more per purchase, not that BTC is inherently more efficient mode of transaction. Is this correct? It's clear to me that you are actually what I call a "well-mannered troll". You come to a Bitcoin forum, not to gain perspective, but with the mistaken idea that thousands of engineers over five years have never realized what glorious knowledge resides in your skull. You are here to free us from our Bitcoin worship. Much like the polite religious folks on bicycles, with their flawed logic and repetitive arguments, when they meet an informed agnostic. Eventually this goes two ways. In person, sometimes you can shake hands and leave, the religious zealot having given up. It can also become more and more aggressive, the tone of discussion becoming one of argument. On the internet this is far more common, as the inner troll begins to show itself. We could do this all day if you were simply benignly slow. We love to help; that's why we write here when it does little for us but feel good to be helpful. But you are bordering on intentional anti-intellectualism. I don't believe it is rocket science to look at the simple two-column chart provided and infer that BTC is significantly better at delivering revenue to Reddit. Therefore you must be trying to ignore it (or deliberately not trying to understand it, which is the same), presumably to return to the religious aspect. Bloomberg has an incredibly visible history of exclusively negative coverage of Bitcoin. Much like the LA Times. Independent journalism is nonexistent these days. Everything is editorialized. You might do well to start reading many sources and coming to a conclusion about the true equilibrium of truth. Otherwise you're no better than a Fox zealot, or an MSNBC loon. I won't argue with one of them, and I won't argue with you. You're taking time away from someone who is genuinely slow but open to new understanding. Go politely browbeat your economic religion into people elsewhere, please. I own Bitcoin, idiot. Thanks for addressing the substance of my post though. Just kidding, you didn't. I simply posted something that has been going through my mind for the last couple of weeks and I can't get over it. I am a relentless doubter, even if I want to believe in something. It is called critical thinking. Go join the legion of bitcoin zombies here, the grown-ups are having a discussion. Asking for genuine responses please. Thanks for the responses. So we all agree that merchants will have to incentivize people to use BTC then? Not as sweet of a deal as it originally sounded for merchants, but overall it appears as though they can still save a percentage point or two overall. So far... Consider this: Bloomberg ran an interesting article the other day that pointed to the fact that the BTC network pays for itself by releasing a constant supply of coins into the market (to miners) which acts to constantly drive the price of BTC down. This amounts to approximately 3.9% at current volumes. ** This percentage will surely go down with an increase in volume and decrease in inflation over time, but still in my opinion, AT BEST it will be 1.5% over the next eight years or so. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-02/bitcoin-is-an-expensive-way-to-pay-for-stuff.htmlSo we have we have 1% deposit fee onto the consumer, and 2-3% onto the merchant as an "incentive fee" in order to compete with CC companies. This averages out to 1.5-2% sum fee to both parties collectively. Put this on top of the 1.5(ideal)-3.9%(actual) fee exacted upon the markets by the maintenace of the BTC network, and we have a total of 3-5.9% overall cost to do business in BTC. Getting expensive. Would love to hear any and all responses. Thanks for your time. ** You can calculate this fee by taking daily bitcoins released (3600) and dividing it by the total daily volume in BTC. See this chart: https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction-percentCan someone address this post please? I have no problem being wrong, in fact I would love it, but it looks to me like BTC is expensive to use. |
|
|
|
Beats in what way? It looks like volume-wise CC wins. The usage vs revenue only points to the fact that BTC users are spending more per purchase, not that BTC is inherently more efficient. Is this correct? |
|
|
|
Thanks for the responses. So we all agree that merchants will have to incentivize people to use BTC then? Not as sweet of a deal as it originally sounded for merchants, but overall it appears as though they can still save a percentage point or two overall. So far... Consider this: Bloomberg ran an interesting article the other day that pointed to the fact that the BTC network pays for itself by releasing a constant supply of coins into the market (to miners) which acts to constantly drive the price of BTC down. This amounts to approximately 3.9% at current volumes. ** This percentage will surely go down with an increase in volume and decrease in inflation over time, but still in my opinion, AT BEST it will be 1.5% over the next eight years or so. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-02/bitcoin-is-an-expensive-way-to-pay-for-stuff.htmlSo we have we have 1% deposit fee onto the consumer, and 2-3% onto the merchant as an "incentive fee" in order to compete with CC companies. This averages out to 1.5-2% sum fee to both parties collectively. Put this on top of the 1.5(ideal)-3.9%(actual) fee exacted upon the markets by the maintenace of the BTC network, and we have a total of 3-5.9% overall cost to do business in BTC. Getting expensive. Would love to hear any and all responses. Thanks for your time. ** You can calculate this fee by taking daily bitcoins released (3600) and dividing it by the total daily volume in BTC. See this chart: https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction-percent |
|
|
|
|
CC's often times offer upwards of 1.5% cash back to the consumer as a reward for using the card. BTC on the other hands costs money to purchase (.5-1%). Why would the consumer buy BTC to pay for something when he could just use his CC and make money?
I have a feeling that these big merchants adopting BTC as a payment platform are going to be largely disappointed by the lack of people who use it.
I don't see BTC becoming a mainstream ecommerce tool unless it rewards customers for using it OR those merchants stop accepting CC payments.
Would love to hear anyone's comment on this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
So what it looks like to me is that you are saying that a paradigm shift so large as for you to be paid your regular salary in bitcoin is required for bitcoin to become cheaper? I'm not saying that bitcoin isn't ideologically better. I am saying that it is going up against practical considerations that are keeping it from going mainstream. So far in this thread people's conditions by which bitcoin becomes cheaper have all been very impractical, at least in the short term (10 years or so.) Even if your employer were to pay you in BTC, your company would have to pay the exchange fee.
My topic isn't what does BTC need to do for YOU to love it. My topic is what does BTC need to do for mainstream users to love it.To me the only solution is for the exchanges to somehow drop the deposit fees.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it is interesting how few people want to talk about this issue. From where I'm standing this is probably the single biggest issue holding bitcoin from being adopted as a mainstream currency. CC's pay you to use them. Paypal is free. Bitcoin COSTS money. No one seems to want to admit that this is a problem.
|
|
|
|
Serious response.
Once Bitcoin's price stabilizes, why would anyone take federal reserve notes that can be instantly created digitally without limit, when you can have something that can't be created in the same manner?
Why? Because they always have and it's so darn easy.
Sure, I get my points on my card, but I encourage bitcoin because it takes the power from the banks who hold onto their money unless the "right" person wants it, I have a business, and product and experience, but that no longer matters to banks, because I am not their type... but I digress. The dollar is going down, so is the Euro and the Yen. It is unsustainable, you know it, we all do. When it goes down and we have that next big crash in the stock market, try to get some gas for $3, just try.
Right now crypto is in it's infancy, so it goes up and down pretty crazily, but it will stabilize, and when it does exchange rates will go down. Right now you have the ability to get in and be a part of something that finally can replace fiat currency, yes, it is going to cost you a little extra to get in, but so does getting into silver or gold. You can't get any at spot, but still many more people buy metals than bitcoin because they view it as a viable alternative to fiat, those same people will be buying bitcoin in the coming years, you can be ahead of them or with them or behind them, or you can hold your dollars till they are almost worthless.
I feel that your reasons for using BTC have an ideological tone, which I'm sure you know doesn't translate to mainstream users. Mainstream users love cash back and convenience, and they hate small fees. They don't know what you are talking about when you talking about the power of the banks and what fiat currencies are. My question is: What is going to make Joe Sixpack on the street corner buy and use bitcoin. Right now I just don't see a compelling argument. |
|
|
|
Your starting with Coinbase is a bad premise.... There are better ways to obtain your bitcoin such as localbitcoins.com.
I have never bought a single bitcoin, nor do I intend to, but let's just say I've had a lot of bitcoin.
Edit:
There is more to worry about the price fluctuation in bitcoin anyways, then compared to a small percentage in buying.
Hopefully, it will go up.... but, as recent days as shown us, that is not always the case.
Coinbase has the convenience, funding, and veneer of a respectable company that frankly others do not have. If BTC is to go mainstream, the BTC exhanges must have each of those three variables. But lets forget about Coinbase. I have yet to see ANY exhange that doesn't charge a premium of some kind. Any premium, no matter how small, cannot compare to the BONUS that you get from dealing with CC's. Am I right? Bitcoin unlike dollars is a deflationary currency which is a factor why they are hard to get hold of
This is an interesting argument. I'll have to think about this one. |
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the reply. I was more alluding to your second paragraph where you described the rational self interest of using CC instead of BTC. To me this is a complete deal breaker for widespread adoption of BTC as a currency. Not only is there not an upfront dollars and cents reason for a consumer to use these coins in transactions, but there is a small PENALTY in doing so, in the range of 2-2.5% (1% coinbase fee and 1-1.5% opportunity cost of not using a CC.
The reasons for a merchant to embrace BTC as a currency are there, but they aren't there for the consumer. All of your points in favor of BTC as a currency are overarching principles which, sound as they are, do not resonate with your average consumer who mainly looks at the face-value and immediate cost of doing business. I can see it working if merchants largely reward those using BTC, but not until then. Think about it, Credit cards generally charge 2-3% to merchants for doing business. Coinbase on the other hand charges 1% to the consumer and 1% to the merchant for a total of 2%. It doesn't really lessen transaction fees that much, it merely shifts it onto the consumer. This is a recipe for failure in my opinion.
To me, it is only when BTC is used as a currency that it will stabilize in price. It needs a stream of transactions constantly to stabilize. This won't happen until the consumer has reason to use BTC as a currency. Right now there isn't a reason.
I'd be interested to hear what you or anyone else thinks of this. I would love to be wrong, so let me know if you see a problem in my line of thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for reading. I'll make it short and sweet. Buying bitcoin costs 1% on America's most popular seller, coinbase. I have heard that others charge as low as .5%. From a consumers and currency standpoint, why would the consumer pay to buy bitcoin to use it as a currency when they could easily use their credit card and GET PAID upwards of 2% on every transaction. I understand that bitcoin is cheaper for the merchant, but it looks to me like it is more expensive for the consumer. I would really appreciate an answer thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
