Why Bitcoin Is Going to Succeed: The Reason Nobody Is Talking About

[psybits]

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

Will it also answer the question of who is paying for this expense?

Yes that's a great idea. Please see how you can contribute here: https://bitcoinstarter.com/projects/31

[Ekaros]

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

Will it also answer the question of who is paying for this expense?

I don't know sufficient amount of macro economics to give real answer. But likely at somepoint the cost of mining is near equivalent to gains of minings as coins. So as many coins are spend for mining as are gained from it. Who exactly ends up losing in this case. In any case it's rather lot of waste...

[yocko06]

+1

[teodor87]

       
        First of all, Bitcoin is going to make it to the mainstream because of the HUMAN FACTOR - Incentive. People are always talking about the pitfalls of the current system - the laggy centralized exchanges, the instability, no decentralized exchange, the fiat payment problems etc. All these problems are going to be solved over time. How? Incentive. Consider who these early adopters are. These speculators include some of the brightest technical and creative minds in the world today, all working and helping each other to solve the same problems. They all own Bitcoins, all their potential fortunes are tied to communally solving these dilemmas, they gain nothing from secrecy and competition, and they are not going to fail. See, this is very new.

Before, a startup company may have hired or included the best coders and strategists they could find, perhaps offered them future stock options to provide incentive to work harder. But these projects were not made public because they needed privacy, otherwise ideas and information might be stolen and used by possible competitors. But in doing so they missed out on the input of the world talent pool.

On the other end of the spectrum are open source Internet projects. Everybody come and work as you please. But because these projects were open to the public, there was no central company to fund any of these coders. Sure, they no doubt worked hard, as it was a hobby or a personal cause - but that nowhere near matches the Bitcoin project momentum. An open source project to replace the currency system for the financial benefit of everyone involved, with the brightest minds in the world able to hop on as they please.

So yes, you are going to have the best, brightest, and richest working towards a common goal. All the while little people - like me - cheer them on, doing whatever little things we can to help(advertising), praying that they succeed.
Microsoft, Google, IBM have never been able to match such a workforce.
We already have more "working employees", all incentivized with "stock options", than they EVER will. You must understand, this is the first project of it's kind in human history. All these petty beginning-stage problems will be overcome - why? Simply because because for the first time we all WANT them to be overcome. You must account for the solutions to problems that we don't understand yet - because they are being attacked by a motivated workforce quality we have never seen before. The problems will eventually be solved, and this is why Bitcoin will make it to the mainstream.

Now once Bitcoin does get there(or perhaps just before) we will run into a problem that many people have pointed out. Market instability. Hoarding by the rich investors, the people who have 10's of thousands of Bitcoins. Detractors rightly say that these overly rich early speculators will simply have too much damn money for there to be room for a stable economy. The graphs bounce with every move they make. However, you are still thinking in terms of the archaic currencies we use today. New systems require new ways of thinking. If this problem is obvious to you, do you not think it is obvious to them and their financial advisers as well?

In the present archaic system these activities continue because the government can just print more currency in order to balance or stimulate the economy, and keep these barons in power. Since this is not possible with Bitcoin, the ultra rich will be forced to do it out of their own pocket. No choice. It is now in their best interest - if they want to have a market to spend those billions in. They will have to spend of some of their money to stimulate the economy in order make their wealth usable, and the distribution of wealth will equal out slightly. The market will stabilize. And because there will be no bureaucracy to support these billionaires' financial staying power, finally the little people will have a chance to make their own fortunes out of hard work and ingenuity in a truly free market. The rich will have to maintain their wealth in the same way.
This is an unprecedented turn of history. It is an evolutionary stage of society that cannot be stopped. To you soon-to-be-rich: remember your responsibilities.
We are finally all in this together.



My fellow humans, Welcome to Bitcoin.



 

First of all - what you wrote borders with communism.

Second - they said that the Roman Empire, the British Empire, the Titanic, the Internet Bubble and Facebook would not fail.

Well guess what - they were wrong.

Simple law of nature - everything could fail. Nothing is certain.

The common currencies are not 100% although there are 3 levels of backup for them.

The whole deal with human societies right now is a house of cards. It's all in our heads and does not really exist.

[psybits]

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

Will it also answer the question of who is paying for this expense?

I don't know sufficient amount of macro economics to give real answer. But likely at somepoint the cost of mining is near equivalent to gains of minings as coins. So as many coins are spend for mining as are gained from it. Who exactly ends up losing in this case. In any case it's rather lot of waste...

Computers are getting more efficient (using less power), and in the future who knows next gen solar panels installed in the home may supply most power for next to nothing so what you have argued above is very short sighted imho, as it doesn't take into account advances in technology.

[Ekaros]

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

Will it also answer the question of who is paying for this expense?

I don't know sufficient amount of macro economics to give real answer. But likely at somepoint the cost of mining is near equivalent to gains of minings as coins. So as many coins are spend for mining as are gained from it. Who exactly ends up losing in this case. In any case it's rather lot of waste...

Computers are getting more efficient (using less power), and in the future who knows next gen solar panels installed in the home may supply most power for next to nothing so what you have argued above is very short sighted imho, as it doesn't take into account advances in technology.

So the limit will be still return of cost for hardware. Supply and demand in case like this is an excellent fundamental... Supply will rise to demand. If there is money to be made by investing some will invest untill it's not profitable anymore.

Hash rates and efficiency has nothing to do with this.

[jdbtracker]

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

Will it also answer the question of who is paying for this expense?

I don't know sufficient amount of macro economics to give real answer. But likely at somepoint the cost of mining is near equivalent to gains of minings as coins. So as many coins are spend for mining as are gained from it. Who exactly ends up losing in this case. In any case it's rather lot of waste...

Computers are getting more efficient (using less power), and in the future who knows next gen solar panels installed in the home may supply most power for next to nothing so what you have argued above is very short sighted imho, as it doesn't take into account advances in technology.

So the limit will be still return of cost for hardware. Supply and demand in case like this is an excellent fundamental... Supply will rise to demand. If there is money to be made by investing some will invest untill it's not profitable anymore.

Hash rates and efficiency has nothing to do with this.

But what if the miners know their costs? They don't have to settle for the market price, they can set it to gain a return on their investment; right now the price is steady at 100, obviously the network has reached concensus and the speculators have been chased away.  Now lets hope it stays that way.

 the miners need to set the market price when they sell their Bitcoins.  they need to start acting like independent business owners calculating their expenses vs production; there are just not enough people with an understanding of supply and demand/business practices... you sure as hell ain't going to see a business owner sell what he has created for less then it costs for them to live.

and that is an awesome idea!!! Solar panels, an increase in hashing power efficiency to factor other than the hardware itself... genius!

[abbyd]

I was referring to an Open Source project in which all contributors had direct financial incentive to see the project succeed. This is the first of its kind. As you also said later in your post. Very cool seeing Bitcoins going to charity work! And just the kind of good press Bitcoin needs to balance out the bad publicity lately.

OP, I agree that the open source model is a strong characteristic of bitcoin which gives it value. However, It's definitely not the first time that a cooperative
model has won over a competitive one - any successful open source project is an example of this (Linux, Firefox, Wordpress, etc.). In all of these
cases, companies sprang forth to support these software projects as soon as it was determined that there was money to be made, and
many contributors ended up having a financial incentive to succeed.

Only the closed-source giants were opposed to these projects, because they cut into their business model. By analogy, only banks and
payment processors are currently opposed to bitcoin. As discussed in other threads, we should probably be "expecting the Spanish Inquisition" from them...

Regarding these Winkeltossers, I don't think these guys are smart enough to do anything besides "buy low, sell high", and "sue somebody".

[jdbtracker]

I agree,

I really like this post, seems the people are fighting back against the missinformation.

 http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/04/mining-bitcoins-takes-power-but-is-it-an-environmental-disaster/

there has been a story going around that Bitcoin mining is the same as gold mining, that it uses resources that are destroyed in its creation, (of course not, the miners secure the system, a necessary expense)
People began dismissing it an bringing up the calculations on how much energy was being used, but this article left out the fact that it is in the miners interest to have the most efficient machines possible.

hmmm, your right, someone should do an article about Bitcoin, a nice thick article that is thorough and split-able into different sections so that media outlets with different known positions can take their spin at it and base it all on fact, pure unadulterated fact straight from us.

We are trying to get the funding for a massive Press Release distribution, spreading the facts about Bitcoin.

Can be seen here: https://bitcoinstarter.com/projects/31

Also we will include that mining is necessary energy expense to maintain the integrity of the Bitcoin network and to make it function at all!

+1

I think this going to be necessary, I've been exploring the legal cases worldwide and Bitcoin has a legal problem... in some countries. how do we address this? we need to spread the truth ASAP!
somehow we must integrate the system to our Banking customers to minimize legal scrutiny.

[jdbtracker]

I was referring to an Open Source project in which all contributors had direct financial incentive to see the project succeed. This is the first of its kind. As you also said later in your post. Very cool seeing Bitcoins going to charity work! And just the kind of good press Bitcoin needs to balance out the bad publicity lately.

OP, I agree that the open source model is a strong characteristic of bitcoin which gives it value. However, It's definitely not the first time that a cooperative
model has won over a competitive one - any successful open source project is an example of this (Linux, Firefox, Wordpress, etc.). In all of these
cases, companies sprang forth to support these software projects as soon as it was determined that there was money to be made, and
many contributors ended up having a financial incentive to succeed.

Only the closed-source giants were opposed to these projects, because they cut into their business model. By analogy, only banks and
payment processors are currently opposed to bitcoin. As discussed in other threads, we should probably be "expecting the Spanish Inquisition" from them...

Regarding these Winkeltossers, I don't think these guys are smart enough to do anything besides "buy low, sell high", and "sue somebody".

What if Bitcoin goes far beyond that? What if Bitcoin is an architectural foundation for an evolutionary step in the internet?  What if we have just made a fountain of value in the middle of the digital dessert? Ready to nurture any project that uses it as it's foundation?   No one has ever been paid for doing something like this directly; No one has thought of the bigger picture The many can become one.

[ZephramC]

I like this thread very much :-].

[Wilikon]

I agree,

I really like this post, seems the people are fighting back against the missinformation.

 http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/04/mining-bitcoins-takes-power-but-is-it-an-environmental-disaster/

there has been a story going around that Bitcoin mining is the same as gold mining, that it uses resources that are destroyed in its creation, (of course not, the miners secure the system, a necessary expense)
People began dismissing it an bringing up the calculations on how much energy was being used, but this article left out the fact that it is in the miners interest to have the most efficient machines possible.

hmmm, your right, someone should do an article about Bitcoin, a nice thick article that is thorough and split-able into different sections so that media outlets with different known positions can take their spin at it and base it all on fact, pure unadulterated fact straight from us.

Isn't google servers crunching our real time search results a disaster for Mother Nature? Isn't by just looking for stats to prove the bitcoin network bad for the polar bears and write an article about it contributing to the death of 1 and half baby seals?

[zakoliverz]

Of course Bitcoin Is Going to Succeed.

[jdbtracker]

I agree,

I really like this post, seems the people are fighting back against the missinformation.

 http://arstechnica.com/business/2013/04/mining-bitcoins-takes-power-but-is-it-an-environmental-disaster/

there has been a story going around that Bitcoin mining is the same as gold mining, that it uses resources that are destroyed in its creation, (of course not, the miners secure the system, a necessary expense)
People began dismissing it an bringing up the calculations on how much energy was being used, but this article left out the fact that it is in the miners interest to have the most efficient machines possible.

hmmm, your right, someone should do an article about Bitcoin, a nice thick article that is thorough and split-able into different sections so that media outlets with different known positions can take their spin at it and base it all on fact, pure unadulterated fact straight from us.

Isn't google servers crunching our real time search results a disaster for Mother Nature? Isn't by just looking for stats to prove the bitcoin network bad for the polar bears and write an article about it contributing to the death of 1 and half baby seals?

It could very well be, no one has done a study on the ratio between search results and death by seal, but I am sure that only a small fraction of the seal pup dies per search result

[abbyd]

What if Bitcoin goes far beyond that? What if Bitcoin is an architectural foundation for an evolutionary step in the internet?  What if we have just made a fountain of value in the middle of the digital dessert? Ready to nurture any project that uses it as it's foundation?   No one has ever been paid for doing something like this directly; No one has thought of the bigger picture The many can become one.

Sure, it's possible. However, I do think people overestimate the ability of money to change the world... it's really about hearts and minds.

Also remember that real wealth can only be extracted from nature by labor. All technology The computers that make bitcoin possible are built on the backs of children mining metals in Africa...

[teodor87]

What if Bitcoin goes far beyond that? What if Bitcoin is an architectural foundation for an evolutionary step in the internet?  What if we have just made a fountain of value in the middle of the digital dessert? Ready to nurture any project that uses it as it's foundation?   No one has ever been paid for doing something like this directly; No one has thought of the bigger picture The many can become one.

Sure, it's possible. However, I do think people overestimate the ability of money to change the world... it's really about hearts and minds.

Also remember that real wealth can only be extracted from nature by labor. All technology is built on the backs of children mining metals in Africa...

You, as well as millions of others, obviously do not know what technology means.

The term "technology" means a production process. For instance a technology for baking bread. From the way the ingredients are mixed, to the conditions of baking to packaging, etc.

What you mean is technics. You cannot build technology. Fact is that 90% of the people are illiterate and do not realize what they're saying half the time.

[bobdude17]

Also remember that real wealth can only be extracted from nature by labor.

Obviously. And that's why we invented currency to manage the movement of that wealth, so that you don't have to take a backpack full of tin or sweet potatoes down to 7-11 to barter for your slurpee.

Sure, it's possible. However, I do think people overestimate the ability of money to change the world...

 ....All technology is built on the backs of children mining metals in Africa...

And that right there is the power of money to change the world. Power goes both ways. So the current management scheme isn't working, especially for the kids in Africa, time for a shift methinks.

[hubbabubbabaker]

Join us, comrades!

[bobdude17]

You, as well as millions of others, obviously do not know what technology means.

The term "technology" means a production process. For instance a technology for baking bread. From the way the ingredients are mixed, to the conditions of baking to packaging, etc.

What you mean is technics. You cannot build technology. Fact is that 90% of the people are illiterate and do not realize what they're saying half the time.

Who cares? We all understood what he meant. Words exist to convey meaning in the context they are used. This isn't an academic paper, why be a dick about it?
Changing the word "technology" to "technics" in his post would not have changed the point he made at all. Besides I've never heard anyone refer to their microwave as technic. Common usage.

[DoomDumas]

Nice call OP !

Cooperation is way better than competition, and Bitcoin promote cooperation like you're saying.. It's doomed to succeed well beyond expectation !

Gratz for this text OP !