...
I imagine people were saying the same about the internet back in 1993.
The Pets.com/Web TV analogy again. Don't you ever get bored? @hdbuck: >for once  Always. Each and every time  |
|
|
|
...
Only if you pretend it is a flaw and not an opportunity for others to build onto the protocol to create solutions that meet the markets demands
When you buy a house & realize you've been sold an empty lot, look at it as an opportunity--you've been sold a chance to build your own! No one ever pretended Bitcoin would natively scale to handle all of the world's transactions Would it surprise you to know that many Bitcointalk users think Bitcoin is ready for primetime? They actually think that Bitcoin is a functional, scalable payment system. Fools  |
|
|
|
...
Bitcoin "payment network" not being able to scale natively to record, validate & retain every coffee purchase does not make it flawed as a proposition for a sound form of money.
The idea of Bitcoin as "a standard on top of which further payment systems must be developed" was, afaik, envisioned by most everyone with a hint of foresight.
I was told that Bitcoin was meant to do just that--"validate & retain every coffee purchase." That's what made it so interesting. Many here still don't get that Bitcoin is no more a proof of concept--an experiment. A precursor, perhaps useful as a standard. No more likely to replace money than an atomic [time standard] clock is to replace wristwatches. |
|
|
|
...
Only if you pretend it is a flaw and not an opportunity for others to build onto the protocol to create solutions that meet the markets demands
When you buy a house & realize you've been sold an empty lot, look at it as an opportunity--you've been sold a chance to build your own! |
|
|
|
^Didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean to imply that Bitcoin's lack of scalability has prevented anyone from making money on it. I just assumed that such fundamental, conceptual flaws would have been addressed by now. Guess not One cannot change the laws of nature. There is no 'fixing' this 'fundamental flaw', and I suspect that many many people never really considered it including most of the devs. 'Addressing it' is a different matter. A few of the devs looked toward the mainstream (mega-corporations to provide infrastructure and the state sponsored legal protections) but happily this doesn't seem to be the first option for most of them. For my part I don't consider this 'fundamental flaw' to be a flaw at all. I consider it more a happy accident of fate and a a feature of reality which produces the potential to make native Bitcoin a system actually work in the real world. By 'work', I mean to remain a genuinely autonomous and independent solution which is robust against attack by vested power interests. As I've said before, the idea of sidechains hit me right away as a means of scaling, and I argued to call native Bitcoin 'blockchain zero' back in 2011. As long as this chain can remain uncorrupted and supportable it really doesn't matter what happens on the infinite number of chains which derive their value from it. Not sure I fully understand. You are happy that Bitcoin is not a practical substitute for money after six years of development, in its current state? Useful only as a peg, a standard on top of which further payment systems must be developed? My question still stands: This [happy accident/feature/totally not a problem] was clear at the outset, why was it not addressed until now? |
|
|
|
^Didn't make myself clear. I didn't mean to imply that Bitcoin's lack of scalability has prevented anyone from making money on it. Just assumed that such fundamental, conceptual flaws would have been addressed by now. Guess not |
|
|
|
just returning to the previous dump value, not really a dump, this is pure manipulation, big fish are eating nicely
I wish to see a day when the bitcoin is free from manipulation and has a stable value. I won't mind going all in on it then I doubt its value will ever be completely stable. i don't understand if a Fiat coin it is not stable in real life, why bitcoin should be??? i see euro, dollar, ruble, yen and all other coins are really volatile!! and there aren't matters!!! It's a question of degree. While USD price fluctuates, BTC price takes epileptic fits--often changing more in a few minutes than the USD does over a whole year. That's why businesses which accept BTC set their prices in real money, and convert the price to BTC at the moment of transaction. |
|
|
|
|
More precisely: No and no.
|
|
|
|
From the bitcoin dev mailing list quoting Wladimir van der Laan: The block chain is a single channel broadcasted over the entire
world, and I don't believe it will ever be possible nor desirable to broadcast all the
world's transactions over one channel.
The everyone-validates-everything approach doesn't scale. It is however
useful to settle larger transactions in an irreversible, zero-trust way.
That's what makes the bitcoin system, as it is now, valuable.
But it is absurd for the whole world to have to validate every purchase of
a cup of coffee or a bus ticket by six billion others.
Naively scaling up the block size will get some leeway in the short term,
but I believe a future scalable payment system based on bitcoin will be
mostly based on off-blockchain transactions (in some form) or that there
will be a hierarchical or subdivided system (e.g. temporary or per-locale
sidechains). ...
Since most thinking persons are starting to catch on to the fact that it does not make sense to broadcast every cup of java purchase to every decentralized infrastructure provider (to hold forever) ... It took six years for Bitcoin intelegencia to realize that 7TPS might be problematic for a currency ...or a minor payment provider. I realize that rocket surgery & MENSA meetings keep you guys real busy, but six years... |
|
|
|
The sun on the meadow is summery warm The stag in the forest runs free But gather together to greet the storm Tomorrow belongs to me  The morning will come When the world is mine Tomorrow belongs Tomorrow belongs Tomorrow belongs to me! |
|
|
|
I know how this ends, Bitcoiners...
  
|
|
|
|
... mass de-dollarization...
...re-tardizilation. Your turn! |
|
|
|
Haha!  Your money is belong to us! |
|
|
|
Again, what is their case?
This is a civil suit, what are the damages?
You cannot just magically sue people for money, despite what tv has shown you.
False advertising and misconception? Could that be a thing? They said things which they weren't. Bitcoin enthusiasts see a compelling rocket pic on interwebs. Luls and lawsuits ensue. |
|
|
|
...
honestly, i really don't get why people are focusing on 3600 number so much. Yes, someone has to buy these coins, but it is a puny number (The equivalent of $828K). Are you saying that 828K selling is depressing the bitcoin price? If so, bitcoin is punier than I thought. In addition, a measly $2K investment by 360 people in 7bil earth will devour these few coins. ...
It's either a lot or a little, but it's still 12%. 12% of total coins in existence had to be bought up in 2014 to keep the price steady. |
|
|
|
...
Actually I think the shit scenario is less improbable.
Shit has been considered art in the past, and people are willing to pay a lot for art, so who knows?
... Yeah, but my shit's value is derived not from its artistic merit, but simple scarcity--there is only so much shit I could produce in my lifetime.* It's much like gold and Bitcoin, my poop is. The supply is limited, demand unlimited  profit!
* I would have to strike a fine balance between eating as much as I can (thus maximizing daily poop output) & eating in moderation (thus extending the duration during which I could work on pooping).
|
|
|
|
^Yep, when BTC was worthless, it was passed around freely, like shitcoins of today. Now that it's actually worth something, the same BTC "Pioneers" suddenly tightened their purse strings Err... I mean far as passing the coin around--they still brag about their mad wealth & teh Lambos bought. P.S: I've been around this community for quite a while, and it was *ALWAYS* full of scumbags, second-rate hustlers & first-rate suckers. |
|
|
|
...
imagine an entity would set a buy wall of 4,2 billion dollar on an exchange - the price could never be lower than 200$ again...
Imagine if that 4.2 billion dollars is removed from an exchange, and is offered instead for a metric ton of my poop? My bowel movements would make me exceptionally wealthy. Sadly, my scenario hinges on the same improbable event as yours: Someone being batshit crazy enough to part with 4.2 billion dollars for our respective treasures. |
|
|
|
...
It's moved far away from the ideals and beliefs of the initial user base to groups of people looking to abuse it for monetary gain... I hope you're not suggesting that a portion of Bitcoin's userbase is motivated by ...greed? Unthinkable! Is there no limit to human depravity, using Bitcoin as if it was real money?! For monetary gain even?!!1! |
|
|
|
...
Interesting historical fact: Some fool, much like you, was saying the same thing to me when I bought at $8 and it slumped down to $4.
What a fool I was.
... Another historical fact: I was told to buy @$1,200 but, like a fool, I resisted. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
