Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2017, 10:17:31 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Realistically does bitcoin have any competition ?  (Read 6069 times)
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 01:28:16 PM
 #121


the greater fool theory states that the price of an object is determined not by its intrinsic value, but rather by irrational beliefs and expectations of market participants. a price can be justified by a rational buyer under the belief that another party is willing to pay an even higher price. in other words, one may pay a price that seems "foolishly" high because one may rationally have the expectation that the item can be resold to a "greater fool" later.

Or sold at a loss to the next buyer to prevent even bigger loss when the trend turns Wink

This theory applies to many things, like fiat money, stocks, bonds, options, swaps, funds etc... In a word, anything that is an abstraction of value can be simply regarded as a thing that you can only dump it to the next people who accept it as payment

And when majority of the people accept it, the loop will be closed and the ecosystem will be self-sustainable like fiat money

1511129851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511129851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511129851
Reply with quote  #2

1511129851
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now A blockchain platform for effective freelancing
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511129851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511129851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511129851
Reply with quote  #2

1511129851
Report to moderator
ebliever
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 01:34:54 PM
 #122

I still hold on to my belief that if someday bitcoin fails for that matter, it will bring down the trust people are having towards cryptocurrencies. That includes all the other altcoins.

It all depends on the reason for failure. If it is one generically applicable to all crypto that would be true. But if it is for a special cause unique to bitcoin's circumstances then it might have little effect on cryptocurrency in general. The block size debate (and how it ends) could be a case in point, since many other alts have different setups for block size as well as governance (for better or worse).

Luke 12:15-21

Ephesians 2:8-9
chennan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 03:20:52 PM
 #123

I still hold on to my belief that if someday bitcoin fails for that matter, it will bring down the trust people are having towards cryptocurrencies. That includes all the other altcoins.


It all depends on the reason for failure. If it is one generically applicable to all crypto that would be true. But if it is for a special cause unique to bitcoin's circumstances then it might have little effect on cryptocurrency in general. The block size debate (and how it ends) could be a case in point, since many other alts have different setups for block size as well as governance (for better or worse).

Absolutely, but at the same time I can see if Bitcoin doesn't completely fall flat and holds this relative price point of $230, I can see it being even possible for another crypto to come in the scene that improves one flaw of Bitcoin to become a complimentive currency. So as most of this thread has been saying about monero holding a better security/anonymity feature, then that currency can be a reputable compliment currency that holds value to that purpose. Or maybe if something comes to play that offers more security than monero then that currency will become the compliment currency.

Or for example, another currency came along that offers a rediculously faster confirmation time for quick and easy transactions, then that will be another compliment... I don't necessarily think Bitcoin will fall flat, it might just share its purchasing power to these complimentive cryptos that allows a user to decide what needs need to be met for the types of transaction he'll be doing.

Coinroll - Bitcoin Dice

[CC6vcXtaDfap8ARZc]
americanpegasus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
September 21, 2015, 03:42:31 PM
 #124


I understand where you are coming from but, again, it appears to me that you are conflating subjective perception of value (or user preference) with fungibility.
 
  
Not at all.  I don't think you fully understand money.  Subjective perception of value is all there is.  Money only exists in the mind of those who value it.  If people don't believe that two satoshis are equal, then they are not equal.


Therefore what we are concerned with is whether or not one satoshi performs the same function as any others. It seems to me that for all practical purpose they do and that Bitcoin makes no distinction between any of them.
 
  
Bitcoin does make a distinction between them by way of a public and browsable blockchain that shows you the history of any bitcoin since inception.  
  
One bitcoin does not equal one bitcoin.  

In fact, I would suggest an individual would be hard pressed to himself distinguish one satoshi from another. Consider this thought experiment:
....
I'm sorry but I seemingly cannot wrap my head around this "chasm" you speak of for the simple fact that as Bitcoin adoption grows it is inevitable that satoshis will cross paths with what you call "tainted" coin, so much that at one point one could probably suggest that a majority of bitcoins in circulation have come in contact with "tainted" coins.
 
  
http://sabr.io/  
  
Blockchain analysis is already pretty good and only going to get better.  A plea to the ignorance of the users is not a good argument.  
  
The final nail in the coffin of bitcoin's fungibility *is* Satoshi's coins.  If all bitcoins were equal and fungible, then it shouldn't matter that Satoshi began spending his coins.  Upon receiving one you shouldn't panic that bitcoin users might start losing faith.  But when dealing with *collectibles* (which bitcoin is) then that becomes an issue.  
  
If you like fine art, and suddenly lots of famous paintings start winding up on your doorstep, you would reasonably assume that the popularity and faith in fine art is plummeting.  
  
In Monero we don't have a Satoshi.  Every user is free to transact, hold, and spend however they choose.  The currency exists independent from the history of each unit.  Gold and the dollar can be traced (with great effort as well) but they still pass the test for fungibility because without expending a massive amount of resources you can't effectively trace their history (especially with gold).  With bitcoin tracing the history of a unit is trivial, and with Monero it's impossible.  
  
You've basically strengthened my point:  
  
Monero isn't just true digital gold.  It's the equivalent of if gold automatically (and magically) went to a smelting facility every time it was spent and was melted down and mixed with other gold before coming back to the new owner.  
  
It's the best form of money that civilization has ever seen.

JeromeL
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 89


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 05:23:28 PM
 #125

Agree with you, monero's fungibility is better than Bitcoin's. And fungibility is a very important property.

Fungibility aside, Monero seems to have significant drawbacks which you forgot to mention : no multisig, no SPV, no GUI, poor scalability (double size keys,...) as well as dubious security decisions (block time, difficulty retargetting, curve ...).

▃▃▃▌▌  PECUNIO  ▐▐▃▃▃▃
BLOCKCHAIN INVESTMENTS SAFE AND EASY
dre1982
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 266


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 05:27:37 PM
 #126

None of the altcoins out there are real competitors for Bitcoin. Bitcoin was the first, most used and most known digital coin. The others can try but I don't think they ever will catch up.
bigfryguy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 416


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 10:17:23 PM
 #127

None of the altcoins out there are real competitors for Bitcoin. Bitcoin was the first, most used and most known digital coin. The others can try but I don't think they ever will catch up.

I agree with you for the short term, but there are new projects arrising that seem to have solved all the problems with Bitcoin.

as far as a storage of wealth goes, it will take a long time for any competitors to inherit bitcoins reign, unless of course bitcoiners decide to draw the wealth of bitcoin and put it into another project.  This is something that has been happenning slowly for the past year or so, but because bitcoin has the infrastucture to get fiat in and out it hasnt been removed from the equation.

The main problems that need to be solved.

1) speed of use:   I will never again buy dinner, coffee or many other things with Bitcoins.  it takes way to long , or it takes you removing the best and only reason to use bitcoin, its decentralized nature

2)reduction in Nodes due to resource requirements:  I am not sure why this has become a problem, probably because in general the community is full of people who just dont care.  there needs to be greater incentives to keep a node open

3)poor distribution of new coins and the centralization of mining.    all the coins are going to large bitcoin farms.

There is at least one coin that has dealt with all these problems, instant transfers, collateral based incentive paying peers, new mining algos.
 probably more than 1.
 In my opinion one of these will take over every role bitcoin has, besides maybe its ability to be a storage of wealth.
But as one of these coins begins to take over Bitcoins infrastructure, or starts having infrastructure that doesnt require bitcoin, it will quickly draw the wealth with it.

for now though, Bitcoin is King.

BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484


View Profile
September 21, 2015, 10:21:14 PM
 #128

Cash!   Smiley
foreveryoung
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 143


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 05:07:48 AM
 #129

from past time,it has not competitor when bitcoin have a high price,but for now,bitcoin potentially have competitor.. lets see LTC or DASH
Flyskyhigh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 292


Ezekiel 34:11, John 10:25-30


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 05:17:23 AM
 #130

I understand there are 600 other coins and that banks might be involved in trying to put in place there own mechanisms based on the blockchain but now that bitcoin has become as big as it has is there even a 10% chance that anything could replace bitcoin in the next few years.

I think Mintcoin will give Bitcoin a run for its money one day.

Sick of mining?  Start minting!  5% per year!  Mintcoin "MINT"
ournem
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 63


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 09:52:31 AM
 #131

Any platform that is a clone of Bitcoin with only a few small tweaks, can't ever really take a serious market share away from Bitcoin. 
Wapinter
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


Bounty Manager


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 10:08:13 AM
 #132

I understand there are 600 other coins and that banks might be involved in trying to put in place there own mechanisms based on the blockchain but now that bitcoin has become as big as it has is there even a 10% chance that anything could replace bitcoin in the next few years.
If you talk about future if any government issues their own crypto,bitcoin will face some serious competition but that is not possible to happen in this decade so I dont see any competition for btc for next 10-15 years
coinplus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 854


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 11:46:49 AM
 #133

I understand there are 600 other coins and that banks might be involved in trying to put in place there own mechanisms based on the blockchain but now that bitcoin has become as big as it has is there even a 10% chance that anything could replace bitcoin in the next few years.
If you talk about future if any government issues their own crypto,bitcoin will face some serious competition but that is not possible to happen in this decade so I dont see any competition for btc for next 10-15 years

Creating own cryptocurrency by any bank or Government is not a problem for bitcoin. The real competitor for bitcoin would be current fiats. Bitcoin needs to out perform them to be widely accepted and to be proffered one. When every service available for bitcoin, it means bitcoin defeated all it's competitors.

                 ▄██▄  ▄▄
                 ▀███▄ ▀█
                   ▀███▄
             ███  █▄ ███▄ ▄██
             ▀███▄ ▀  ███▄ ▀ ▄▄▄▄
               ▀███▄▄ ▄▀███▄ ▀███▄
            ▄██  ▀████▄▀ ▀███ ▀███▄
          ▄███▄▄█▄ ▀████▄█████ ██▀▀██▄
        ▄██████████  ▀██████▀▀█▀ ▄▄ ███▄
       ██████▀▀██████▄ ▀███▀▀▄ ▄███ ██ ██▄
     ▄██████▄▄████████▀  ▀██▄  ███▀ ██ ███▄
    ████████████████      ▀█▀ ███▀ ███ ████
  ▄████████████████        █ ███▀ █▄▄  ▄███
▄████████████████▀          ████▄█████ ███▀
████████████████▀            ▀▀█ ▀▀██████▀
██████████████▀             ▄█▄██ ▀█████▀
█████████▀▀▀                ██████▄▄▄███
▀████████                   ▀██████████▀
  ▀▀▀▀▀▀                      ▀███████▀


                     ▄          ▄███ ▄███                 ▄▄▄
  ▄▄▄              ▐██           ██▌  ██▌                ▀███▌
 ███▀              ▄██          ▐██▌ ▐██▌          ▄▄     ███
 ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄  ▄▄   ▄█████▌  ▄██▄██  ███  ███ ▄▄████▌  ███▄   ▐██▌▄██
▀██▌ ▀██████  ███▀███  ███████▐████████▌▐██████▌ ▐████▄  ███████
▐██▌ ▐██▀ ██ ███  ██▌ ███▀ ██▀ ▄██  ▐█▌▐██▀ ██▌  █▀ ███▄▐███▀██▌  ▄
███  ██▌ ██▌ ██▌ ▐██ ▐██▌ ▐██  ██▌  ██▌███  ██▌ ▄█ ▄ ███▐██ ▐██  ██
███▄███  ██▄▄██▄▄███▄███▄▄▄██▄███▌ ▐██▌▐██▄▄██▄██ █▄▄██▌██▌ ▐██▄██
 ▀█▀██▌  ▀███▀▀███▀██▀ ▀██▀▀▀████  ▐██  ▀███▀▀██  ▀███▀ ██   ▀██▀
█▀▀ ▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀ ▄▄█
|130 PEOPLE TEAM
70 MARKETS
300,000 INFLUENCERS
|█▀▀ ▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀ ▄▄█
ICO█▀▀ ▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀▄▄██
▄▄██▀▀▄▄
▀▀▄▄██▀▀
██▀▀ ▄▄█
RGBKey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546



View Profile WWW
September 22, 2015, 03:16:46 PM
 #134

I do not think that other altcoin have any chance to remove bitcoin and become in its place because these coins are only a copy from the original thing with is bitcoin
And I think banks can not control bitcoin because it is decentralized
Any platform that is a clone of Bitcoin with only a few small tweaks, can't ever really take a serious market share away from Bitcoin. 
I agree, the direct clones of bitcoin aren't going to make any waves, but the innovative platforms might make a difference.

coinpr0n
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896



View Profile
September 22, 2015, 03:52:59 PM
 #135

I liked this blog post http://tpbit.blogspot.ca/2015/09/the-dawn-of-great-crypto-extinction-and.html ... Copy-coins themselves aren't much competition although some of them do have community (Dogecoin) and good dev teams / adoption (Litecoin). Crypto2.0 coins do offer more competition like Ethereum and Ripple which go beyond the original code base.

brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 10:24:06 PM
 #136

Not at all.  I don't think you fully understand money.  Subjective perception of value is all there is.  Money only exists in the mind of those who value it.  If people don't believe that two satoshis are equal, then they are not equal.

Bitcoin does make a distinction between them by way of a public and browsable blockchain that shows you the history of any bitcoin since inception.  
  
One bitcoin does not equal one bitcoin.  
  
http://sabr.io/  
  
Blockchain analysis is already pretty good and only going to get better.  A plea to the ignorance of the users is not a good argument.  
  
The final nail in the coffin of bitcoin's fungibility *is* Satoshi's coins.  If all bitcoins were equal and fungible, then it shouldn't matter that Satoshi began spending his coins.  Upon receiving one you shouldn't panic that bitcoin users might start losing faith.  But when dealing with *collectibles* (which bitcoin is) then that becomes an issue.  
  
If you like fine art, and suddenly lots of famous paintings start winding up on your doorstep, you would reasonably assume that the popularity and faith in fine art is plummeting.  
  
In Monero we don't have a Satoshi.  Every user is free to transact, hold, and spend however they choose.  The currency exists independent from the history of each unit.  Gold and the dollar can be traced (with great effort as well) but they still pass the test for fungibility because without expending a massive amount of resources you can't effectively trace their history (especially with gold).  With bitcoin tracing the history of a unit is trivial, and with Monero it's impossible.  
  
You've basically strengthened my point:  
  
Monero isn't just true digital gold.  It's the equivalent of if gold automatically (and magically) went to a smelting facility every time it was spent and was melted down and mixed with other gold before coming back to the new owner.  
  
It's the best form of money that civilization has ever seen.

I'm sorry but it is increasingly apparent to me that you are making a tragic mistake of conflating very different economic concepts.

For one, individual perception of value is quite different from the market's perception of value.

Bitcoin's traceability might make it interesting for someone with a collector's mindset but it has no impact on its fungibility.

It would be one thing for the market to disagree on the value of individual satoshis but this is absolutely impossible as they are totally undistinguishable from one another. Let me use two different examples to show why your analysis fail:

- Certain gold artifacts are valued at way more important prices then the actual market worth of their weight in gold. Does that make gold a "collectible"?

- A lot of people enjoy collecting notes and coins from certain years. A bundle of cash stolen from a bank might be identified and refused in certain circumstances because of its serial number. Does that make cash a "collectible"?

These two examples, I believe, demonstrate that what you refer to as an absence of fungibility is simply a consequence of individual or authorities attaching subjective value to an item because of its history but this is not an indictment on the monetary system itself!

Imagine one individual in possession of one of these gold artifacts or a special 20$ note attempts, for some unknown reason, to either trade his gold item to a pawnshop or deposit the 20$ at the bank.

What do you guess happens? If we assume the guy running the pawnshop doesn't know or care about the "symbolic" value of the item and is only concerned with its weight in gold no amount of history is going to bring him to buy said item for more than its market worth. Same for his "special bill", the cashier at the bank could not careless if it was used by Al Capone to do lines of cocaine, to her it's worth 20$ and no more.

The same logic applies for Bitcoin. If I am in possession of one of Mt. Gox's stolen coin and send it to Bitstamp, the market is not going to offer me a premium or refuse to buy it. Sure some nerds might cry foul and alert the exchange. In that case I could still head to fucking China and sell the same coin for market price on whatever their equivalent of localbitcoin is and no one will ask me any question.

I am curious why you did not address my thought experiment about the tainted coins but allow me to reiterate using your Satoshi scenario as I am confident it supports my position that no distinction can be made between two satoshis.

Let's pretend I have one of Satoshi's wallet address and decide to send him a bitcoin. How can you tell which one is mine from his stash?

In fact I do believe there is quite a lot of people that have sent him dust or coins over the years. If somehow he decides to move this lot of coins to an exchange are people somehow going to make a distinction between his original coins and whatever amount that was sent to him by these clowns? Of course no because they can't!

This effectively demonstrates that your logic does not hold. The market could careless whatever coin Satoshi decides to move, it is not the coins that matter because THEY ARE INDEED FUNGIBLE. It is their owner's decision that has a psychological impact on the market because they can identify ownership through the public ledger. Let's say we pretend that somehow someone is able to tie Satoshi's identity to a wallet/coins from...2013. Surely you would agree that the psychological impact on the market would be the same whether he decides to move these coins to BitStamp or the "original" ones.

Your "famous painting" example is downright stupid. If these would end up on my doorstep tomorrow one could only wonder who the fuck was stupid enough to pull off such a move and collectors all over the world will be willing to purchase them back at auction. That is because art pieces are truly a collector's item. Every paintings are unique, not "mutually interchangeable" and cannot be replaced by even an identical copy.

All of this is to say you are confusing privacy and traceability and somehow making this aspect of Bitcoin an indictment on its fungibility. Again, this is a mistake. What Monero offers is a baked-in solution for obfuscating the origins of every coin. Nothing more.

Now you're betting the house that technology isn't going to allow practical and seamless ways to do the same using Bitcoin. I would personally wager to say the odds are against you.

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
kelsey
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


View Profile
September 22, 2015, 10:29:10 PM
 #137

Any platform that is a clone of Bitcoin with only a few small tweaks, can't ever really take a serious market share away from Bitcoin.  

completely disagree. btc got alot right, why change the tried and tested, so its a good place to start.

many seem to think here original code written after btc automatically means better then btc...yet to see any that's an improvement on btc.
chennan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204


View Profile
September 23, 2015, 01:40:43 AM
 #138

I liked this blog post http://tpbit.blogspot.ca/2015/09/the-dawn-of-great-crypto-extinction-and.html ... Copy-coins themselves aren't much competition although some of them do have community (Dogecoin) and good dev teams / adoption (Litecoin). Crypto2.0 coins do offer more competition like Ethereum and Ripple which go beyond the original code base.

Isn't Ripple supposed to be what Monero was based off of? If I'm not mistaken I remember reading that Ripple was supposed to be the first of the "cryptonote" coins to come out.  I haven't even done much research on the alts because I'm lazy and want to stick to talking about something that I know a little more about like bitcoin in general.

Coinroll - Bitcoin Dice

[CC6vcXtaDfap8ARZc]
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
September 23, 2015, 01:41:29 AM
 #139

I liked this blog post http://tpbit.blogspot.ca/2015/09/the-dawn-of-great-crypto-extinction-and.html ... Copy-coins themselves aren't much competition although some of them do have community (Dogecoin) and good dev teams / adoption (Litecoin). Crypto2.0 coins do offer more competition like Ethereum and Ripple which go beyond the original code base.

Isn't Ripple supposed to be what Monero was based off of? If I'm not mistaken I remember reading that Ripple was supposed to be the first of the "cryptonote" coins to come out.  I haven't even done much research on the alts because I'm lazy and want to stick to talking about something that I know a little more about like bitcoin in general.

Nop.

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
MasterYii
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
September 23, 2015, 07:04:22 AM
 #140

I understand there are 600 other coins and that banks might be involved in trying to put in place there own mechanisms based on the blockchain but now that bitcoin has become as big as it has is there even a 10% chance that anything could replace bitcoin in the next few years.

As much as I know the original rival of the btc is the paper money or the cash and thats it I dont think it is a big deal really.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!