Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 10:57:59 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Oddly Stable  (Read 5036 times)
Synaptic
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 15, 2011, 03:34:14 PM
 #41

...you were saying?
I was saying that Napster failed and Bittorrent succeeded for the same reason that PayPal failed (to achieve the founders original intentions) and Bitcoin will succeed  - centralized control.

The only thing that can kill Bitcoin is insufficient demand for it. As long as people desire a decentralized currency the technology will outpace efforts to eliminate it.

I think you're a bit behind on the debate, friend.

It seems to me we've pretty much come to a consensus that centralization of certain bitcoin functions is inevitable, and even desirable.

The whole anarcho-libertarian cryptastic orgycoin concept is only appealing for a very select minority.

So, it's very very likely that demand could dry up quite quickly unless such centralization takes hold.

I don't understand how any of you got the idea in your heads that decentralized currency was ever in demand...frankly, the entire world minus you and a couple of your buddies that we could list in a small notepad, simply do not give two flying fucks about crapto-currency.
1481367479
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481367479

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481367479
Reply with quote  #2

1481367479
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481367479
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481367479

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481367479
Reply with quote  #2

1481367479
Report to moderator
1481367479
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481367479

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481367479
Reply with quote  #2

1481367479
Report to moderator
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
June 15, 2011, 03:42:25 PM
 #42

I think you're a bit behind on the debate, friend.

It seems to me we've pretty much come to a consensus that centralization of certain bitcoin functions is inevitable, and even desirable.

The whole anarcho-libertarian cryptastic orgycoin concept is only appealing for a very select minority.

So, it's very very likely that demand could dry up quite quickly unless such centralization takes hold.

I don't understand how any of you got the idea in your heads that decentralized currency was ever in demand...frankly, the entire world minus you an d a couple of your buddies we could write down in a small notepad, simply do not give two flying fucks about crapto-currency.
You haven't dealt with a lot of small business owners, have you? The concept of a low-cost means of exchange that doesn't have a single authority that can arbitrarily reverse a transaction six months after a sale is extremely appealing.
Synaptic
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 15, 2011, 03:46:55 PM
 #43

I think you're a bit behind on the debate, friend.

It seems to me we've pretty much come to a consensus that centralization of certain bitcoin functions is inevitable, and even desirable.

The whole anarcho-libertarian cryptastic orgycoin concept is only appealing for a very select minority.

So, it's very very likely that demand could dry up quite quickly unless such centralization takes hold.

I don't understand how any of you got the idea in your heads that decentralized currency was ever in demand...frankly, the entire world minus you an d a couple of your buddies we could write down in a small notepad, simply do not give two flying fucks about crapto-currency.
You haven't dealt with a lot of small business owners, have you? The concept of a low-cost means of exchange that doesn't have a single authority that can arbitrarily reverse a transaction six months after a sale is extremely appealing.

You haven't dealt with a lot of consumers, have you? The concept of an insured, high security means of exchange that doesn't have many disconnected and possibly untrustworthy entities, that can also allow you to dispute a charge when the product or service delivered is unsatisfactory, without having to resort to bringing a lawsuit, is extremely appealing...

And then?
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
June 15, 2011, 03:52:46 PM
 #44

You haven't dealt with a lot of consumers, have you? The concept of an insured, high security means of exchange that doesn't have many disconnected and possibly untrustworthy entities, that can also allow you to dispute a charge when the product or service delivered is unsatisfactory, without having to resort to bringing a lawsuit, is extremely appealing...

And then?
People still use cash.
Synaptic
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
June 15, 2011, 03:58:26 PM
 #45

You haven't dealt with a lot of consumers, have you? The concept of an insured, high security means of exchange that doesn't have many disconnected and possibly untrustworthy entities, that can also allow you to dispute a charge when the product or service delivered is unsatisfactory, without having to resort to bringing a lawsuit, is extremely appealing...

And then?
People still use cash.

Not online...

Unless they're starting to use Dwolla Grid, which the whole point of is the things I mentioned...
Jaime Frontero
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126


View Profile
June 15, 2011, 04:17:03 PM
 #46

You haven't dealt with a lot of consumers, have you? The concept of an insured, high security means of exchange that doesn't have many disconnected and possibly untrustworthy entities, that can also allow you to dispute a charge when the product or service delivered is unsatisfactory, without having to resort to bringing a lawsuit, is extremely appealing...

And then?
People still use cash.

Synaptic has a valid point:  consumers do want a chargeback option.

sellers don't.  sellers prefer to base their business model on reputation.  they don't want third parties getting between them and their buyers.

consumers want transactors which save them the embarrassment of returning goods 'face-to-face'.  and yes, some are thieves, or simply dishonorable.

there's room for both models - i don't see a problem.

no seller is going to limit himself to one payment system.  i can see a time not too far off when Bitcoin sales are offered at a discount roughly equal to the fees from other payment processors + a pooled fraction of theft.  something like that.

the good thing in all of this is that entities like PayPal will stop kissing consumer ass, and chargebacks will become much more difficult: they always should have been.
imperi
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
June 15, 2011, 04:38:17 PM
 #47

BTC is not going to be "stable" in the way described here until it gets much closer to its actual value, which is at least hundreds of times its current value.

This made me LOL. Thanks error.
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  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!