Signed. But what happens when it reaches 5000? Nothing. That's why it astounds me that people with IQ's over twelve still start these things. -B- |
|
|
|
glorious paragraphs ... Your text is so beautiful ... You're fierce determined personality Ouchhh. Usually people screw that up the other way around. Lets hope you are a dude with big t*tties, because he wont be marrying you for your brainz. -B- |
|
|
|
I don't think Bitcoin and gold need to compete with one another, that for Bitcoin to rise gold has to collapse. I think both of them need to be on parity of each other, in this case Bitcoin to be on parity with gold. Bitcoin and gold share very much the same fundamentals, both are a store of value of deflationary nature against the inflationary fiat.
Actually gold really isn't worth as much as it is now but it really doesn't matter, people just want something that does not lose value to back against fiat. Bitcoin is the digital equivalent of gold. Just like how money evolve to being digital, mere numbers on a computerized banking system, gold too will be digitized. An that digitized gold is Bitcoin.
So why not peg Bitcoin to gold? Of course Bitcoin being a decentralized and a non-authoritative system no one can force Bitcoin to be pegged to anything but only the people who use bitcoins themselves. Can there be any other way that Bitcoin be priced at some specific value other than being dictated by the free market, that is the exchanges, which are prone to manipulation?
Why did you write "Bitcoin to be pegged to gold" like this was an announcement, or a news article conveying this fact to be true? Are there click whores even on discussion forums? If you're going to start a thread asking a question, dont make a title that looks like a factual announcement. I hate reading that shit only to find out that the OP thinks he has a neat idea. |
|
|
|
The words "green" and "bitcoin" don't belong in the same sentence. Maybe they haven't realised the eye watering amount of electricity bitcoin guzzles up.
Shhhhhh!!! -B- |
|
|
|
How can Bitcoin ever become a successful global currency when a single entity is in possession of 5-10% of what will ever be in circulation?! If he decides to sell at any point, huge inflation is guaranteed.
I know it's likely that he'll never sell the coins for the sake of anonymity and personal safety, or for the sake of the system. Possible he has even destroyed the private keys. But it doesn't seem certain enough that we can make that assumption.
I'm a little surprised that this hasn't been more widely discussed - so am I missing something?
I have always viewed Satoshi holding such a large batch of funds, so that one day, if Bitcoin encounters a catastrophic event, those coins could be used to kickstart the economy again. And I have a gut feeling that this is what Satoshi was thinking when he retained a chunk of the economy for safekeeping. .... "If its needed one day". -B- I am not sure how his bitcoin could "kickstart" the bitcoin economy. If something were to hypothetically happen that would cause bitcoin to have little/no value then additional coins in circulation would only make things worse. I think it would be very possible for satashi to sell his bitcoin in a controlled fashion so that him selling would result in massive price declines. If he were to announce that he will sell no more then 1,800 BTC per day (after the block subsidies half again) then the net effect would be that the same number of coins would be coming onto the market as before the subsidies halved Knew I should have put some disclaimers so someone wouldn't nitpick lol  I don't know which one, of ten million possible scenarios may play out, but it seems that holding a large batch of a limited economy, would address numerous possible future problems that could come up. A guy who invents Bitcoin isn't going to do something stupid to damage the economy like selling his coins to crash the price. Its far more likely there is an altruistic reason he's holding these coins. And I am sticking with my theory that its to one day help maintain the system in case of emergency. -B- |
|
|
|
How can Bitcoin ever become a successful global currency when a single entity is in possession of 5-10% of what will ever be in circulation?! If he decides to sell at any point, huge inflation is guaranteed.
I know it's likely that he'll never sell the coins for the sake of anonymity and personal safety, or for the sake of the system. Possible he has even destroyed the private keys. But it doesn't seem certain enough that we can make that assumption.
I'm a little surprised that this hasn't been more widely discussed - so am I missing something?
I have always viewed Satoshi holding such a large batch of funds, so that one day, if Bitcoin encounters a catastrophic event, those coins could be used to kickstart the economy again. And I have a gut feeling that this is what Satoshi was thinking when he retained a chunk of the economy for safekeeping. .... "If its needed one day". -B- |
|
|
|
|
Bitcoin is money.
Money is a whole different animal than "Information" (the internet).
Comparisons between Bitcoin and the Internet should be spoken with that important distinction in mind.
Free exchange of Information is something that was already protected by laws. So the internet's growth happened naturally and without much resistance.
If we lived in a world where information was outlaw-able, controlled by 3-6 major corporations, or poised to nullify the relevance of major financial institutions, then the internet would've had a much different path.
The path Bitcoin is going to be taking.
-B-
|
|
|
|
Isn't there something we can do about it? Im told Bitcoin is "programmable money". Does the dev team know that? -B- |
|
|
|
I'm still considering selling 8.9 BTC...  but why? Shhhh. Don't ask. It's Natural Selection in action. Just let it happen. -B- |
|
|
|
This is an immutable, self-evident, mathematical truth. Two technologies fulfilling the same purpose usually do not coexist for very long, in historical terms. The old way dies, naturally, as the new grows to take it's place.
There are numerous examples of competing technologies coming along, growing a little, then fizzling out, as the status quo remains. Millions of examples. It is not a given that the new technology competing with the existing one will overtake and succeed. Not sure where you got that. Though its a very nice thought, and we all hope it will pan out that way. -B- |
|
|
|
Well you still have 3600 coins mined every single day. Maybe half of those are sold. If there's no demand for 1800 or so daily, meaning ~$1m new buys per day, the price must come down.
This. The end. -B- |
|
|
|
Is it just me or does it seem like the bitcoin "craze" has died down a lot? Not as much people active in talking about it, and especially in other forums for altcoins, there used to be a lot of buzz and excitement but not any more it seems  Start listening to the Bitcoin Podcasts and you'll see the very opposite picture being painted. Quite a bit going on all over the world. More than ever. Stay informed. Podcasts are the best way to do it these days. -B- |
|
|
|
|
Read the rest of the thread.
This is all good news, par for the course, and growing pains towards what will eventually come.
You seem to have left all that out.
-B-
|
|
|
|
They constantly ask for money, yet they refuse to make it convenient to donate.
That is a pretty funny / irritating irony, you're right. Especially with the name "CHANGE" (something new / different) ... too. -B- |
|
|
|
|
Dogecoin?
Why? Folks ... Bitcoin needs to succeed if you want "X" joke coin to have any chance of succeeding.
Please pour your efforts into Bitcoin, until the time has come that crypto is a mainstay.
I don't understand people's thinking sometimes. :-/
I try not to assume that they're just mindlessly supporting a joke coin because they missed the Bitcoin train, and hope to get rich, but ...
------------
Summary of your idea
Proposal - Use cryptocurrency for organised sustainable microlending. Cryptocurrency is at a stage when it transcends commodity status. People use it to buy pizzas, donuts, games, stuffed dogs and cars. Dogecoin, one such digital currency, has been used to dig wells, sponsor NASCAR drivers, build houses, and fund tropical countries at the Winter Olympics. The project will leverage the inherent advantages of dogecoin - no transaction costs, instant worldwide transfer, low financial entry barrier, no administration costs, generous community with a history of giving - to organise a sustainable microlending programme. Microfinance has been shown to improve financial inclusion and supports the entrepreneurial ambitions of a global populace. The project is split across two phases: P1) Contributions will be collected in dogecoin, converted to fiat currency and sent to shortlisted global microfinance institutions (shortlist based on repayment rates, systematic and open process, history, credibility). The funding is provided in fiat to show proof of intent from the dogecoin community. P2) Funds raised are sent in dogecoin to institutions, benefiting them with the above listed advantages. The first phase is necessary to show that (expected) smaller financial contributions from a larger base can significantly impact the funding to new entrepreneurial projects. Main objective - To raise $5,000 worth of dogecoin in the first phase of the project, and to shorlist 3 institutions which will be used as channels for impactful microlending. Loans once repaid will be reinvested to set up a sustainable base for funding projects. The completion of the first phase will signal the potential for using cryptocurrencies which break many of the traditional barriers to using smaller quanta for financial support. Empowering a bigger part of the global population will open up new means of allowing people to help others from the comfort of their homes.
|
|
|
|
Cool video. Seems very easy and straightforward. I like the name "BTM". That should definitely become the new standard. Even has that "Next generation *A* .... tm. Now *B* ... tm" feel to it. Love double-meanings $460 CHF = $491 USD. What was the price of Bitcoin at the filming of this video? Just trying to see if the buy price is marked up like a lot of other BTM owners are doing (much to my chagrin). -B- |
|
|
|
|
Simply getting people's mindset from the "physical" to the "virtual" was a huge obstacle for Bitcoin that will begin to dissolve, thanks to Apple. That alone is monumental, in my opinion.
-B-
|
|
|
|
 This one is sick as fuck, conceptually. Could you move the transition to electronic further into the coins? Maybe halfway? And all the "virtual" versions maybe lighter like the one on bottom? Its an amazing picture, and one I would expect to see all over news articles. Especially if you made several variations of this. Like one with a single coin simply transitioning halfway through. etc etc I think this represents Bitcoin *amazingly* well. The transition from physical to virtual. I have a friend who has the ear (email) of several reporters who have written on Bitcoin many times. Im sure they would be all over a batch of images where the coins are going virtual like this. -B- |
|
|
|
|
We're pushing 10 months of "stagnancy" (is that a word?). Its three months longer than last years. Its painful.
But I just keep reminding myself that the launchpad for the rocket to the moon is currently being built (infrastructure/merchant adoption/regulation). Got to wait for that to finish first.
-B-
|
|
|
|
|
I hear this mentioned often. Maybe someone can clear something up for me. People warn that if the price of Bitcoin doesn't rise, miners will suffer, and that means Bitcoin will suffer. Isn't this a self-adjusting system though? If difficulty gets too hard, fewer people mine, and difficulty goes back down. If miners suffer due to low BTC values, fewer miners will mine, difficulty will decrease, and profitability will still be worthwhile to those who remain. It will reach a new (lower) equilibrium. So is there really a concern?
Thanks
-B-
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
