Is bitcoin going to catch on or crash and burn? You vote!

[Desolator]

Just wondering what everyone's opinions are.  If you want to be super specific, the question is "Do you think that the percent of bitcoin transactions (based on the SUM of values, not number of trades) that are made by people who use bitcoins but have never generated any will ever exceed 50%?"  In other words, do you think that there will be more people using bitcoins than generating them someday?  The other option is the system crashes and burns



DO NOT scroll down unless you voted



















seriously, stop it!























go vote first!




















Okay, so my opinion is it will catch on and have more non-miner usage than miner usage one day.  You don't have to be over 18.  You don't have to get your credit checked.  There's no transaction fees.  You don't need some big bank operating in your country.  Those 4 things could literally make it the only option for currency transactions online for millions of people.  Plus, if some country pulls a Russia and their currency collapses, it's kinda hard and a lot of paperwork and expenses to switch to USD or Euros.  They'd be likely to hop on bitcoins, especially if everyone donated bitcoins to them in a sufficiently high volume.  I think there's no way popularity would just fall off simply because of that.

Everyone says if energy prices go to 5x higher all of a sudden, that's the end of it.  Well there goes 95% of the miners so it's 20x more lucritive for the people still mining and me and my $1000 high tech solar rig that I'll set up and operate for free would be doing just fine, thanks So I don't think that's a legitimate concern.  A world war would only help promote its use because "bulletproof" established currencies would topple all over the place.  Something better coming out?  That's almost mathematically and logically impossible but if it did come true, it would be so similar that it would be basically the same exact thing and we'd all just switch to that and call it something else....like bitclams lol.  I think that hits every disaster scenario in the wiki so yay, it's gonna suceed

Btw, I'm no economist but I was forced to take it in college and play MMORPGs so I'm pretty darn sure that if more people trade their currency for bitcoins than people trading bitcoins for currency, that makes the value go up.  So if it does take off, the bitcoins you have right now will be worth many many many times more money   So if someone says it's stupid, stuff that in their stocking lol 

[Desolator]

lol apparently more people than I thought "dunno"

(Iunno is "I dunno" conjoined and thus missing the necessary apostophe but you already knew that)

[wumpus]

My crystal ball dysfunctioned, and reading the guts of a fish also didn't come up with a satisfactory answer, so I had to vote "dunno".

[Morebitcoinsplease]

I believe bitcoins will keep going as long as people believe in it and can trade goods & services for it.

[illuminati31337]

I believe bitcoins will keep going as long as people believe in it and can trade goods & services for it.

Ditto.  Even as it currently drops slowly in value, I'm able to mine at a rate that offsets my losses and still pays for the electricity, and I have a fairly modest mining setup.


Lou Minati Elite
1ApTKDumSdGQXgcGx4zbqKVFTqRr4Mtctz

[getsum]

The only thing that will keep it going is if goods and services are traded in bitcoins. Mining alone is worthless without people willing to purchase bitcoins.

[repentance]

I believe bitcoins will keep going as long as people believe in it and can trade goods & services for it.

Ditto.  Even as it currently drops slowly in value, I'm able to mine at a rate that offsets my losses and still pays for the electricity, and I have a fairly modest mining setup.


Lou Minati Elite
1ApTKDumSdGQXgcGx4zbqKVFTqRr4Mtctz

In the long term, the aim is for those who maintain the network to make money from confirming transactions rather from mining.  It's difficult to project now whether that will be profitable enough in the future for people to contribute their resources to that process or how high the fees will need to be in order for remaining part of the network to be attractive to current miners.

[_saiko]

I'll vote for yes
In that vote I got somewhere 50% of hope that it really will going to catch on, and 50% of trust that everything will be fine seeing the success it had so far.

[Desolator]

The only thing that will keep it going is if goods and services are traded in bitcoins. Mining alone is worthless without people willing to purchase bitcoins.

You're right.  What most people don't get is that we have more than enough people to maintain the system at the moment.  What we need is to stop telling people to start mining or we all make less money.  If we tell people that there's an awesome new currency with no fees and no stupid legal BS to jump through that anyone in any country can use with no overhead fees and they should try using it instead of paypal in their next purchase if applicable, then we'd all make money cuz there would be a higher volume of people buying into the currency.

[72289]

As long as people actually buy and exchange Bitcoins instead of hoarding them I see it being a decent online currency. Right now though I voted I don't know.

[BrimStone]

My worry is that the perceived value of Bitcoin will not exceed the "known" value of current currency transaction methods.

At this point it is very hard to conduct trade in a trusting manner.  You don't have to look very far to see scams and no protection for the consumer.

If you think about the "Granny" model you will see this.  The question is "Could your granny use this?  How easy would it be for someone to rip her off?  What would she do about it? Could she do anything?"

This example can be spread to 85% of the public.  Most people just want to be able to make sure they can buy and sell without worry.

In the early days of eBay this was a major problem.  You would sell, someone would not send a payment.  You had to fight with eBay over the fees.

Also, you would buy something and pay -- no item every shows up.

The use of a escrow system for payments and transactions is the first thing people did back in the late 1990's on the Internet.  What we are seeing with bitcoins is history repeating itself.

[gigabytecoin]

My crystal ball dysfunctioned, and reading the guts of a fish also didn't come up with a satisfactory answer, so I had to vote "dunno".

I disemboweled myself and decided based on how the entrails landed.

[woo]

I think the price will dip to a more stable value first before being adopted. It's too risky for businesses to deal with the lack of stability.

[modded-account]

I think it'll keep rising for now, then settle as the difficulty gets to the point that almost all cpu mining is worthless.

[FCTaiChi]

It will take time, but after volatility is over.. and if we can go through some long patches (years) of security it should be no problem.

[wormbog]

I see the 21 million limit on coins to be ultimately stifling to the economy. If more people get interested in bitcoin there will be more demand and exchange rates will rise. As rates rise people start to look at bitcoin as an investment. There is a strong motivation to hold onto whatever bitcoins you get, because of the "buy low, sell high" investment mentality.

The problem is, bitcoin will never be widely used if there is not a growing base of people using it actively for commerce. People will hold their bitcoins and spend their deflationary dollars instead. Dollars are always slowly losing value. There's no motivation to hoard.

What bitcoin needs is a parallel currency that slowly deflates so people will be motivated to get rid of it. Let's call it Newcoin for the sake of argument. Newcoin would be identical to bitcoin but with a slowly increasing yield from mining instead of a decrease. When people want to buy something they spend Newcoins. When they want to set aside money for the future they'll trade newcoin for bitcoin and hold it in an offline wallet.

Bitcoin is the virtual equivalent of gold. People don't spend gold. We need the virtual equivalent of cash.

[a63ntsm1th]

I would agree that the success of bitcoin in both value and as a currency depends on its acceptance by vendors and then producers. If it continues as it does now, with the vast majority of transactions being only mining and speculation, then there will be a horrible crash.

As it stands I believe that the acceptance of the currency by business as a form of payment will be outpaced by the mining and speculation process, meaning the currency is and will be over valued.

Oh by the way, here's how to know if you are speculating with either mining or buying of bitcoins:  Is the potential for profit a function of the rise in price of bitcoins? If yes, then you are a speculator.

Some miners may be able to profit at current prices, but if prices fall then they will become less profitable, or even operate at a loss.

Until bitcoin becomes more accepted as a form of payment, and people can invest in it and expect a return without a rise in price, then I would say we are off to the races!

At the moment though I would say we are all speculating

[a63ntsm1th]

Bitcoin is the virtual equivalent of gold. People don't spend gold. We need the virtual equivalent of cash.

This statement nicely summarizes your post, and also the complete error of it. Remember gold WAS the currency of the United States of America up until gold confiscation in 1933. However US dollars were still technically redeemable (if you were a foreigner) and thereby backed by gold up until 1971.

A perfect example of the exact opposite of your argument happens everyday. Technology continues to improve everyday and become cheaper as it does so.  The deflationary pricing of technology does not cause anyone to shy away from purchasing today what they know will be obsolete or even useless in a mere couple of years. It could be argued hi-tech is the only industry that has done well in the last few decades (edit: besides the financial services industry).

The hoarding argument is a fallacy, an illogical argument disputed by the facts. However this argument has been ingrained into the social subconscious by inflationists, as I'm sure you can find video evidence of Ben Bernake supporting your view.

[BTConomist]

In order for bitcoin to catch on as a currency, the general public needs to see value in the communities/businesses build around bitcoin, not in the bitcoin itself. Essentially, bitcoin must first become the de facto currency within its own economy before it can be considered a viable competitor to the fiat currencies, which today support the activities of numerous multimillion-dollar businesses.

Unfortunately, the developer/miner crowd does not seem to be realizing that just yet, otherwise they'd be spending bitcoin.

[FCTaiChi]

I see the 21 million limit on coins to be ultimately stifling to the economy. If more people get interested in bitcoin there will be more demand and exchange rates will rise. As rates rise people start to look at bitcoin as an investment. There is a strong motivation to hold onto whatever bitcoins you get, because of the "buy low, sell high" investment mentality.

The problem is, bitcoin will never be widely used if there is not a growing base of people using it actively for commerce. People will hold their bitcoins and spend their deflationary dollars instead. Dollars are always slowly losing value. There's no motivation to hoard.

What bitcoin needs is a parallel currency that slowly deflates so people will be motivated to get rid of it. Let's call it Newcoin for the sake of argument. Newcoin would be identical to bitcoin but with a slowly increasing yield from mining instead of a decrease. When people want to buy something they spend Newcoins. When they want to set aside money for the future they'll trade newcoin for bitcoin and hold it in an offline wallet.

Bitcoin is the virtual equivalent of gold. People don't spend gold. We need the virtual equivalent of cash.

I see the part about people hoarding could be a problem, but I think they will realize that the community needs to grow, and will do what they can to encourage it.
The comparison to gold breaks down when we talk about breaking gold down.  If gold were as convenient as bitcoins it wouldn't be a problem, and people would use it and invest it.  You are right that there are 21 million, but not JUST 21 million.  Being able to divide them infinitely with no cost is an amazing benefit.  Currently the true cap is 21,000,000.00000000
That's 2.1E15 possible bitcoins.  That could be expanded if needed.