What would it take for you to lose faith in Bitcoin?

[xlcus]

When I am the last node remaining.

This

[1714898486]

1714898486

[1714898486]

1714898486

[1714898486]

1714898486

[1714898486]

1714898486

[kokjo]

if/when a hacker finds and exploits a flaw in the scripting that does he can empty all accounts.
its done before, but not exploited.

[Rassah]

If no market for bitcoins develops, would you lose faith?  Say the market for bitcoins continues to exist in its current state where there are limited products/services you can buy?

If all that Bitcoin ever has is a healthy exchange market, it will still work as a store of value similar to gold, and will still be ok. Even speculation by itself, in something that retains value and can be easily traded, has "intrinsic" value.

[BTC Economist]

If no market for bitcoins develops, would you lose faith?  Say the market for bitcoins continues to exist in its current state where there are limited products/services you can buy?

If all that Bitcoin ever has is a healthy exchange market, it will still work as a store of value similar to gold, and will still be ok. Even speculation by itself, in something that retains value and can be easily traded, has "intrinsic" value.

That's interesting.  It could essentially be a way to speculate on energy prices.

[rampone]

I will loose faith, if the "up next" economic breakdown will kill the internet, before that: all sails up, and ahoy btc

[Shinobi]

That would be a failure of the bitcoin movement to convince the general public, not a failure of bitcoin specifically.

A pointless distinction for the purpose underlying Bitcoin. OP, your questions show that you are thinking correctly about this experiment. Good job.

[elggawf]

If all that Bitcoin ever has is a healthy exchange market, it will still work as a store of value similar to gold, and will still be ok. Even speculation by itself, in something that retains value and can be easily traded, has "intrinsic" value.

It's not really a store of value in the system it has now though - disregarding any possible future of it becoming more than it is right now, it's merely a game of hot potato. If no economy surrounding it develops like we hope it will, then everyone criticizing Bitcoin, calling it a game of "hot potato" is suddenly correct. IMHO they're only wrong because these people consider it a foregone conclusion that it will never amount to anything more than a crypto-geek libertarian wet dream, but that doesn't mean I think it's impossible it could go that way.

All the speculation and valuation surrounding Bitcoin right now is from people looking at what could be not what is. If that "could be" disappears, and the groups of people who end up wanting Bitcoin dry up, value goes to the shitter. As such without the hopes for a real economy (or at least a need for the type of pseudo-anonymous worldwide funds transfer) it is not a store of value at all.

[Lynzoi]

"Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." - Tolstoy

Meaning, there are many ways this could go wrong, I can't predict. I suppose my biggest worry is a lack of interest. No interest = no demand = no money. Strangely, I'm relying on the government continuing to screw up. If the government does things right, nobody is going to get into alternative currency.

[Rassah]

It's not really a store of value in the system it has now though - disregarding any possible future of it becoming more than it is right now, it's merely a game of hot potato.

All the speculation and valuation surrounding Bitcoin right now is from people looking at what could be not what is. If that "could be" disappears, and the groups of people who end up wanting Bitcoin dry up, value goes to the shitter.

By that assumption gold, which also really doesn't have much of an economy, can be considered a "hot potato," too. It's not just the economy of Bitcoin that we have to consider, but the market surrounding it. If some third-world country (or US) has its currency tank, and people decide to use Bitcoin to secure their savings, because buying gold is not an option, that "speculation" or store of value alone will keep its price up. In that case, Bitcoin can even survive and grow before any economy is actually built to use it as an actual currency (kind of like what it's doing now)

[Shinobi]

If all that Bitcoin ever has is a healthy exchange market, it will still work as a store of value similar to gold, and will still be ok. Even speculation by itself, in something that retains value and can be easily traded, has "intrinsic" value.

It's not really a store of value in the system it has now though - disregarding any possible future of it becoming more than it is right now, it's merely a game of hot potato. If no economy surrounding it develops like we hope it will, then everyone criticizing Bitcoin, calling it a game of "hot potato" is suddenly correct. IMHO they're only wrong because these people consider it a foregone conclusion that it will never amount to anything more than a crypto-geek libertarian wet dream, but that doesn't mean I think it's impossible it could go that way.

All the speculation and valuation surrounding Bitcoin right now is from people looking at what could be not what is. If that "could be" disappears, and the groups of people who end up wanting Bitcoin dry up, value goes to the shitter. As such without the hopes for a real economy (or at least a need for the type of pseudo-anonymous worldwide funds transfer) it is not a store of value at all.

Well said. But as much people talk a big game about wanting a legitimate Bitcoin marketplace, few have done anything about it. The only real "entrepreneurial" endeavors I see posted are just extensions of the speculation game - options markets and flat-out pyramid schemes and the like. To me, it seems that the supposed "ideological" fervor is really just (1) euphoric talk to drive the value for speculative gains and/or (2) a product of cognitive dissonance. Everyone talks "new global currency" but most treat it like a casino.

[BTC Economist]

It's not really a store of value in the system it has now though - disregarding any possible future of it becoming more than it is right now, it's merely a game of hot potato.

All the speculation and valuation surrounding Bitcoin right now is from people looking at what could be not what is. If that "could be" disappears, and the groups of people who end up wanting Bitcoin dry up, value goes to the shitter.

By that assumption gold, which also really doesn't have much of an economy, can be considered a "hot potato," too. It's not just the economy of Bitcoin that we have to consider, but the market surrounding it. If some third-world country (or US) has its currency tank, and people decide to use Bitcoin to secure their savings, because buying gold is not an option, that "speculation" or store of value alone will keep its price up. In that case, Bitcoin can even survive and grow before any economy is actually built to use it as an actual currency (kind of like what it's doing now)

Gold is not an appropriate analogy because it has been demanded as a show of opulence for centuries.  Yes, gold does not have the practical use of a commodity like oil, but it is still useful (often in a mating context).  This property of gold has actually been studied and various shows of opulence have existed across cultures through time.

[holgero]

If someone found out that the system was flawed or if a successor got more traction than bitcoin. But I don't think either of these is likely. (There remains a risk, but: no risk, no fun.  )

[Shinobi]

If someone found out that the system was flawed or if a successor got more traction than bitcoin. But I don't think either of these is likely. (There remains a risk, but: no risk, no fun.  )

Why don't you think the latter is likely? All it would take is a more concerted branding effort and a more user-friendly operation and it would wipe this shit out of the water.

[FlipPro]

If 256 SHA encryption is cracked. And if that happens, Bitcoins will be the last of our worry's....

[elggawf]

By that assumption gold, which also really doesn't have much of an economy, can be considered a "hot potato," too. It's not just the economy of Bitcoin that we have to consider, but the market surrounding it. If some third-world country (or US) has its currency tank, and people decide to use Bitcoin to secure their savings, because buying gold is not an option, that "speculation" or store of value alone will keep its price up. In that case, Bitcoin can even survive and grow before any economy is actually built to use it as an actual currency (kind of like what it's doing now)

To an extent, yes. The price of gold is vastly over-inflated for it's actual uses, however:

Despite the fact that it's useless in every respect, people will gold plate a firearm as a display of wealth. Bitcoin has no such application. Bitcoin has also only really had any worth for a year (give or take), whereas we've been conditioned for millenia that gold == wealth. Bitcoin does not share the same "store of wealth" conventions that gold and other precious metals enjoy. While I can't explain the motivation behind people considering to pay $1500/oz or whatever the fuck gold is worth right now, the fact is that for some reason people think it's worth that much right now.

People only think Bitcoin is worth $17 right now because of what could be in the future, not because of the things they can do with it right now.

[holgero]

If someone found out that the system was flawed or if a successor got more traction than bitcoin. But I don't think either of these is likely. (There remains a risk, but: no risk, no fun.  )

Why don't you think the latter is likely? All it would take is a more concerted branding effort and a more user-friendly operation and it would wipe this shit out of the water.

Got no real reason for my thinking here.... Ok, I got to admit it is more that I believe it is not likely. (But thats all right, as the question was about "faith", right?)

[cunicula]

If someone found out that the system was flawed or if a successor got more traction than bitcoin. But I don't think either of these is likely. (There remains a risk, but: no risk, no fun.  )

Why don't you think the latter is likely? All it would take is a more concerted branding effort and a more user-friendly operation and it would wipe this shit out of the water.

Yup, cryptocurrency with a crypto-denominated financial market would also "wipe this shit out of the water".  There is a good chance though that facing competition would encourage developers to address these issues. i.e. the successor could wipe bitcoin out or or it could just serve as a much needed wake up call. Current adoption levels would give bitcoin some time to react.

[dinzy]

I will lose faith if the market stays like it is, not trades, no motion, nothing.  It needs to either rise or fluctuate to keep me interested.  If it doesn't rise, then mining will soon be silly and if it doesn't fluctuate then trading is not fun or rewarding. 

[Rassah]

But as much people talk a big game about wanting a legitimate Bitcoin marketplace, few have done anything about it.

It takes time. Although Bitcoin has existed for about two years, it has only "existed" in the public view for maybe two months. I'm working on setting up some exchanges in other countries, and that alone will likely take months, even before people can use those exchanges with their local stores to actually use them to sell stuff.

[DamienBlack]

A sustained attack from a larger network, aimed at nothing but destroying the network. By the size of our current network, and the growth rate, I don't think this is ever going to happen.