I am pretty confident we are the new wealthy elite, gentlemen.

[Arriemoller]

This document is fresh from the press, it's not yet availible in english för som odd reason, but if you can read any of the other 17 langugeses that it comes in it is very interesting.
In short, one of the Swedish  high courts has asked the European court for advice on where Europe stands on taxing the exchange of bitcoin to fiat and vice vesa. This in turn because a Swedish citizen appealed a decision from the Swedish tax authorties on paying tax for the exchange of bitcoins he is doing in his company.
The european advocat general Juliane Kokott suggests as a verdict that bitcoin should be regarded as a currency and not be taxed. The court usually go with the advocat generals suggestions.

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?doclang=DE&text=&pageIndex=0&part=1&mode=DOC&docid=165919&occ=first&dir=&cid=388883

[1713569227]

1713569227

[1713569227]

1713569227

[1713569227]

1713569227

[1713569227]

1713569227

[1713569227]

1713569227

[1713569227]

1713569227

[notbatman]

I'm still not wealthy or elite, I'm starting to think the OP is a troll.

[explorer]

I'm still not wealthy or elite, I'm starting to think the OP is a troll.

Did you not get in your notbatmobile way-back-machine and buy some 2010-2011 bitcoin? 

[notbatman]

I'm still not wealthy or elite, I'm starting to think the OP is a troll.

Did you not get in your notbatmobile way-back-machine and buy some 2010-2011 bitcoin? 

No, the batmobile lost a wheel and the joker got away.

[explorer]

I'm still not wealthy or elite, I'm starting to think the OP is a troll.

Did you not get in your notbatmobile way-back-machine and buy some 2010-2011 bitcoin? 

No, the batmobile lost a wheel and the joker got away.

Ahh.  I'd heard the rumor, sorry to hear it confirmed.  No wealth or elitism for you yet, I'm afraid.

[tyz]

I am personally are not a fan of regulation. But if Bitcoin should become mainstream and if it should create more value (in order to become the rich new elite  ) then regulation is absolutely needed

A lot of people are upset about the increased regulation that Bitcoin is seeing.

That regulation came about as a direct result of Mt.Gox (and several others) failing to honor their commitments, and is mostly intended to prevent a recurrence.  Given what the effin' amateurs whose pretenses or attempts at doing solid business have cost Bitcoin holders so far, it's not a disproportionate response.

So, whatever other people feel about increased regulation, I can't say that it was the wrong thing to do.

[ragi]

I am personally are not a fan of regulation. But if Bitcoin should become mainstream and if it should create more value (in order to become the rich new elite  ) then regulation is absolutely needed

A lot of people are upset about the increased regulation that Bitcoin is seeing.

That regulation came about as a direct result of Mt.Gox (and several others) failing to honor their commitments, and is mostly intended to prevent a recurrence.  Given what the effin' amateurs whose pretenses or attempts at doing solid business have cost Bitcoin holders so far, it's not a disproportionate response.

So, whatever other people feel about increased regulation, I can't say that it was the wrong thing to do.

Regulation hold everything back. And who and how is going to regulate bitcoin? Exchanges can be, but bitcoin itself no.

[ransomer]

Right now there's a lot of wait-and-see.

I don't think Bitcoin will rise much higher than it has - at least not sustainably - until mainstream investment places and fund managers are satisfied that Bitcoin is able to scale to at least thousands of tx per second.  

Meaning, we not only need to make the block sizes bigger, but we also need to develop new technology.  Side Chains, Fractalized blocks, or ... whatever.  But right now it's not taken very seriously because, five transactions a second?  And with a 20Mbyte block it'll go up to maybe a hundred?  Don't make an investor (or a broker) laugh, that's not even a good attempt at a payment system that could get off the ground in a serious way.  And so it gets dismissed.

Bitcoin could go above its current value, and stay there, only if the scalability issue gets addressed in a credible way.

The possibility that Bitcoin could take over all of the business of Visa/MasterCard is laughable. It took BankAmericard nearly 60 years to grow that kind of worldwide user base. PayPal, on the other hand, could be replaced with a superior system within 20 years or so. It would only take 100tps to replace all of the volume of PayPal. I doubt investors are laughing at PayPal. Blocksize will not need to be increased by much to handle PayPal sized transaction volume.

There are problems here that tps increases can't solve even with no cap and the highest grade nodes in every third house around the globe. As I mentioned above, Bitcoin needs to be a superior system in the minds of the current users of PayPal/Visa to steal away their customers. Where are the proposals for fraud protection, auto rental collision damage insurance, travel rewards, flyer miles, roadside assistance, cash back rewards, signature rewards, merchant discounts, etc. Bitcoin ease of use is about as different from Visa as a horse drawn carriage is to the automobile. Ease of use needs drastic improvements before Visa will need to start fretting. To think we can increase the tps rate and magically say, "ok, we're equal to Visa now just drop that plastic and come on over and use Bitcoin" is a child like mentality.

We need service companies. What is important is:

1) The market should require that the money they produce (the money extensions) should have the name bitcoin, not bitcoin backed pesos and the like. That is to avoid a devaluation. (Hey, now I get only a half bitcoin for my Instapay bitcoin, wtf!! That is a big red cloth to customers).

2) The market should require that they are readily redeamable. You might lose trust in them, or want another supplier. For this we need the maximum transaction per second number that the blockchain could possibly provide.

3) The market should require that they are fully backed. Could be cryptgraphic proof of reserve, but i fear that could be a lie.

Anyway, if a service company disappoint, there will be no way to save them by abusing the money system. If the public wants to save such company, it will have to be through taxation or loaning (with a nonfucked interest rate, good luck with that). I think the market will go for private insurance.

Isn't that a bit the same as saying "it is laughable to argue that Amazon in a few years could be big... it took Barnes and Noble 80 years to be a big player...".

...

[7bestone7]

sorry for a little bit off topic question, but how a guest can write on this forum? the 1st post was posted by an anonymous poster that was guest am i getting something wrong?

[Erdogan]

Right now there's a lot of wait-and-see.

I don't think Bitcoin will rise much higher than it has - at least not sustainably - until mainstream investment places and fund managers are satisfied that Bitcoin is able to scale to at least thousands of tx per second.  

Meaning, we not only need to make the block sizes bigger, but we also need to develop new technology.  Side Chains, Fractalized blocks, or ... whatever.  But right now it's not taken very seriously because, five transactions a second?  And with a 20Mbyte block it'll go up to maybe a hundred?  Don't make an investor (or a broker) laugh, that's not even a good attempt at a payment system that could get off the ground in a serious way.  And so it gets dismissed.

Bitcoin could go above its current value, and stay there, only if the scalability issue gets addressed in a credible way.

The possibility that Bitcoin could take over all of the business of Visa/MasterCard is laughable. It took BankAmericard nearly 60 years to grow that kind of worldwide user base. PayPal, on the other hand, could be replaced with a superior system within 20 years or so. It would only take 100tps to replace all of the volume of PayPal. I doubt investors are laughing at PayPal. Blocksize will not need to be increased by much to handle PayPal sized transaction volume.

There are problems here that tps increases can't solve even with no cap and the highest grade nodes in every third house around the globe. As I mentioned above, Bitcoin needs to be a superior system in the minds of the current users of PayPal/Visa to steal away their customers. Where are the proposals for fraud protection, auto rental collision damage insurance, travel rewards, flyer miles, roadside assistance, cash back rewards, signature rewards, merchant discounts, etc. Bitcoin ease of use is about as different from Visa as a horse drawn carriage is to the automobile. Ease of use needs drastic improvements before Visa will need to start fretting. To think we can increase the tps rate and magically say, "ok, we're equal to Visa now just drop that plastic and come on over and use Bitcoin" is a child like mentality.

We need service companies. What is important is:

1) The market should require that the money they produce (the money extensions) should have the name bitcoin, not bitcoin backed pesos and the like. That is to avoid a devaluation. (Hey, now I get only a half bitcoin for my Instapay bitcoin, wtf!! That is a big red cloth to customers).

2) The market should require that they are readily redeamable. You might lose trust in them, or want another supplier. For this we need the maximum transaction per second number that the blockchain could possibly provide.

3) The market should require that they are fully backed. Could be cryptgraphic proof of reserve, but i fear that could be a lie.

Anyway, if a service company disappoint, there will be no way to save them by abusing the money system. If the public wants to save such company, it will have to be through taxation or loaning (with a nonfucked interest rate, good luck with that). I think the market will go for private insurance.

Isn't that a bit the same as saying "it is laughable to argue that Amazon in a few years could be big... it took Barnes and Noble 80 years to be a big player...".

...

I want bitcoin to be a big player with millions of transactions per second, but that is still not enough.

[neurotypical]

Right now there's a lot of wait-and-see.

I don't think Bitcoin will rise much higher than it has - at least not sustainably - until mainstream investment places and fund managers are satisfied that Bitcoin is able to scale to at least thousands of tx per second.  

Meaning, we not only need to make the block sizes bigger, but we also need to develop new technology.  Side Chains, Fractalized blocks, or ... whatever.  But right now it's not taken very seriously because, five transactions a second?  And with a 20Mbyte block it'll go up to maybe a hundred?  Don't make an investor (or a broker) laugh, that's not even a good attempt at a payment system that could get off the ground in a serious way.  And so it gets dismissed.

Bitcoin could go above its current value, and stay there, only if the scalability issue gets addressed in a credible way.

The possibility that Bitcoin could take over all of the business of Visa/MasterCard is laughable. It took BankAmericard nearly 60 years to grow that kind of worldwide user base. PayPal, on the other hand, could be replaced with a superior system within 20 years or so. It would only take 100tps to replace all of the volume of PayPal. I doubt investors are laughing at PayPal. Blocksize will not need to be increased by much to handle PayPal sized transaction volume.

There are problems here that tps increases can't solve even with no cap and the highest grade nodes in every third house around the globe. As I mentioned above, Bitcoin needs to be a superior system in the minds of the current users of PayPal/Visa to steal away their customers. Where are the proposals for fraud protection, auto rental collision damage insurance, travel rewards, flyer miles, roadside assistance, cash back rewards, signature rewards, merchant discounts, etc. Bitcoin ease of use is about as different from Visa as a horse drawn carriage is to the automobile. Ease of use needs drastic improvements before Visa will need to start fretting. To think we can increase the tps rate and magically say, "ok, we're equal to Visa now just drop that plastic and come on over and use Bitcoin" is a child like mentality.

We need service companies. What is important is:

1) The market should require that the money they produce (the money extensions) should have the name bitcoin, not bitcoin backed pesos and the like. That is to avoid a devaluation. (Hey, now I get only a half bitcoin for my Instapay bitcoin, wtf!! That is a big red cloth to customers).

2) The market should require that they are readily redeamable. You might lose trust in them, or want another supplier. For this we need the maximum transaction per second number that the blockchain could possibly provide.

3) The market should require that they are fully backed. Could be cryptgraphic proof of reserve, but i fear that could be a lie.

Anyway, if a service company disappoint, there will be no way to save them by abusing the money system. If the public wants to save such company, it will have to be through taxation or loaning (with a nonfucked interest rate, good luck with that). I think the market will go for private insurance.

Isn't that a bit the same as saying "it is laughable to argue that Amazon in a few years could be big... it took Barnes and Noble 80 years to be a big player...".

...

I want bitcoin to be a big player with millions of transactions per second, but that is still not enough.

If things go as planned we should be about paypal level in the next decade.


But we should aim for total world domination. Bitcoin must deprecate all other payment methods, to the point people feel stupid using them. We must make them feel as if they are still using paper mail when we got email. Bitcoin's ultimate goal is #1 electronic global transaction, anything else is being a pussy. All or nothing.

[tyz]

I mean regulation as a collection of rules that all "legal" Bitcoin companies has to follow. Every institutional investor needs statutory requirements in order to be able to invest debt capital into Bitcoins or crypto currencies in common.

I am personally are not a fan of regulation. But if Bitcoin should become mainstream and if it should create more value (in order to become the rich new elite  ) then regulation is absolutely needed

A lot of people are upset about the increased regulation that Bitcoin is seeing.

That regulation came about as a direct result of Mt.Gox (and several others) failing to honor their commitments, and is mostly intended to prevent a recurrence.  Given what the effin' amateurs whose pretenses or attempts at doing solid business have cost Bitcoin holders so far, it's not a disproportionate response.

So, whatever other people feel about increased regulation, I can't say that it was the wrong thing to do.

Regulation hold everything back. And who and how is going to regulate bitcoin? Exchanges can be, but bitcoin itself no.

[Amph]

If things go as planned we should be about paypal level in the next decade.

snip

paypal level is joke, i'm quite certain that we can reach their volume next year with the halving, no need to wait a decade for that, bitcoin is moving at a much faster rate

this is true for the TX volume, there was a graph that was making a comparison between all the payment system, i'm trying to find it

[NyeFe]

If things go as planned we should be about paypal level in the next decade.

snip

paypal level is joke, i'm quite certain that we can reach their volume next year with the halving, no need to wait a decade for that, bitcoin is moving at a much faster rate

this is true for the TX volume, there was a graph that was making a comparison between all the payment system, i'm trying to find it

[Amph]

yeah that's it thank you(there was another one actually but they depict the same thing so this is ok too), note that we are not far from paypal if we grew up to 300m in 6 years, reaching 400M, should not takes more than two year by a linear point of view

but since the growth is not linear at all, the next year could be the year where we surpass paypal and maybe Discover(pulse network), top 5 is not so unattainable

[oblivi]

Actually Satoshi Nakamoto said something along the lines of "if Bitcoin isn't used everywhere in 10 or 20 years it will not exist" so he clearly aimed for a global usage. Bitcoin is exactly that, all or nothing, it was never designed to stop at some sort of small internet niche, this is really the next level in money and not only that, in tons of things as well since we know the Blockchain can be used for endless tasks.

[LiteCoinGuy]

Actually Satoshi Nakamoto said something along the lines of "if Bitcoin isn't used everywhere in 10 or 20 years it will not exist" so he clearly aimed for a global usage. Bitcoin is exactly that, all or nothing, it was never designed to stop at some sort of small internet niche, this is really the next level in money and not only that, in tons of things as well since we know the Blockchain can be used for endless tasks.

The holy lord said:

Feb. 14, 2010:

I’m sure that in 20 years there will either be very large (bitcoin) transaction volume or no volume.

[errornone]

After the BOOM of bitcoin, what was the low price it ever was?

[Scamc0p]

After the BOOM of bitcoin, what was the low price it ever was?

I saw it was $124 going through all the threads from the past 2 years. Earlier than that, I wouldn't want to guess. Remember it being said it was $50 but that was at the btc rate increase.

[Bagatell]

After the BOOM of bitcoin, what was the low price it ever was?

I saw it was $124 going through all the threads from the past 2 years. Earlier than that, I wouldn't want to guess. Remember it being said it was $50 but that was at the btc rate increase.

$100 on Bitfinex Feb 2014

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/bitfinex/btcusd