WallStreet Whales are coming: FIG Bitcoin MegaFund

[kkaspar]

So what is the purpose of these Bitcoin funds? Right now probably only 10% of the Bitcoins mined are actively being traded or used as currency and the rest are being held as a form of investment. So here are these two large trusts holding 200k-300k coins? eliminating them from ever being used as what Bitcoins were design for, which is currency. I am pretty sure these trusts are going to get larger and hold larger reserves of Bitcoins. What is the purpose of these trusts holding onto a large reserve of Bitcoins other than placing a value on them. I understand if Bitcoins can be actively used as a form of currency and be used to purchase goods and services, but if the majority of the coins that are traded are owned by trust funds and the value of Bitcoins are dictated by these funds, which means they are associated hand in hand with traditional currency it simply defeats the purpose of Bitcoins.      

That is the outcome of an deflative currency, that has concentrated wealth and an unregulated market system. There is just too much room for greed and greed will eat the system from inside out till people will lose faith into that system. The future is not in bitcoin, the future is in the idea that bitcoin gave about the monetary system being able to go private, so the success of an particular system would be judged by free-competition, not by state law.

[Ibian]

So once again then. Greed is what keeps the system running. The network is only as strong as the hashing behind it and nobody would invest in expensive rigs without expecting to profit from it. Greed is necessary for bitcoin. Greed is Good.

[kkaspar]

So once again then. Greed is what keeps the system running. The network is only as strong as the hashing behind it and nobody would invest in expensive rigs without expecting to profit from it. Greed is necessary for bitcoin. Greed is Good.

I agree that greed is what also gave BTC it's power. Without greed there wouldn't be all those people whose only interest in bitcoin is to buy low and sell high. But this is part of the exact reason why bitcoin will fail - the community that mostly consists of greedy and single-minded people won't be progressive enough to succeed.
The currency that will attract people by it's complexity of cash inflow and the effectiveness in transaction technology, will dominate bitcoin with it's more advanced technological aspects. Bitcoin started a great idea and greed helped to propagate that idea, but this won't go far because the system built on greed will eventually eat itself inside out.

[Interized]

So once again then. Greed is what keeps the system running. The network is only as strong as the hashing behind it and nobody would invest in expensive rigs without expecting to profit from it. Greed is necessary for bitcoin. Greed is Good.

In that sense, all Government, Business, Banks, Churches, Religion, etc is all greedy.

No, it isn't greed.

It is finding usefulness in life, people find Bitcoin a more useful tool to keep and manage value.

That is what makes Bitcoin work.

Nothing is free.

[Ibian]

So once again then. Greed is what keeps the system running. The network is only as strong as the hashing behind it and nobody would invest in expensive rigs without expecting to profit from it. Greed is necessary for bitcoin. Greed is Good.

In that sense, all Government, Business, Banks, Churches, Religion, etc is all greedy.

No, it isn't greed.

It is finding usefulness in life, people find Bitcoin a more useful tool to keep and manage value.

That is what makes Bitcoin work.

Nothing is free.

Ait. You are a miner. You lose money mining. Why did you spend $100000 on equipment and triple your electric bill? Why did you choose to do that?

[Ibian]

the community that mostly consists of greedy and single-minded people won't be progressive enough to succeed.

This doesn't say anything. What do you mean in practical terms?

The currency that will attract people by it's complexity of cash inflow and the effectiveness in transaction technology, will dominate bitcoin with it's more advanced technological aspects.

Which? Doge? Lite?

Bitcoin started a great idea and greed helped to propagate that idea, but this won't go far because the system built on greed will eventually eat itself inside out.

According to which holy book? Nothing like this has ever been attempted before, what do you base that statement on?

[DPoS]

people still think silver is hitting $200 'very soon'

there IS a saturation level to the amount of money that flow into bitcoin's price.
some are counting on the demise of the dollar, but if that happens any new currency will likely pay nice interest as this ZIRP debt spiral is over with.

so I wouldn't wait until the dollar is completely dying to move most wealth out of bitcoin, since any reset will have a currency paying interest and people will flock their wealth there for returns.

[kkaspar]

This doesn't say anything. What do you mean in practical terms?

Which? Doge? Lite?

According to which holy book? Nothing like this has ever been attempted before, what do you base that statement on?

To me the success of MtGox is the best proof of the quality of the bitcoin community. Bitcoin.org still promotes it as the main exchange and the volumes are high. Although MtGox is highly flawed at best, but it's more probable that their "flaws" are deliberate and a method to manipulate the market. The community should shun places like that and people should just stop using it. But still, a very big part of community is using this exchange.
Also I rarely see people who are interested in the bigger picture of cryptos and who see that the bitcoin software isn't very advanced with it's 10 minute confirmation time, double spending, 51% attack problems and the excess usage of computer hardware. I see that most of the community truly believes that BTC will last for decades and will cost tens of thousands in the future.
It's hard for me to understand how can they believe this. If the idea of an privatized monetary system really proves itself, then what stops companies like google to amass an army of talented software engineers to create a crypto that is faster, more secure and more user-friendly then bitcoin? I think that it is silly to think that Bitcoin will be able to compete with future coins. it's like saying 14 years ago that Napster is the future of music distribution.
Delusions like that are mostly shared by people who are looking for get-rich-quick schemes, that sound pretty and look easy. We can mostly see those kind of people in self-motivational classes or involved in pyramid schemes, always looking for an easy way to get rich without actually doing anything that matters.

I don't think that there is a coin yet, that has a future longer then couple of years.

Not an holy book, but common logic. Bitcoin shouldn't be so attractive as an investment that leads to hoarding. When hoarding is attractive in an unregulated market, then a rule applies, those who have more, those can earn more at the expense of those who have less. This will lead to bigger wealth distribution issues then fiat ever had with global banking. Without fair distribution there is no trust of the majority and without trust there is no value in the specific currency. Deflative currencies could be theoretically created, but with strongly regulated markets that take care of fair distribution and excess hoarding. But I wouldn't recommend anyone to go down this road...
And also, with Proof-of-Work, the investment money goes to miners. The arms race of mining is just silly, because the resources spent doesn't outweigh the security gained. The security solution would make some sense when mining wouldn't be pooled together into single points, that can be compromised just as well with 1TH/s or 2TH/s of network power. The inflow of new money should be A LOT more complex then it is now. Proof-of-Stake is more advanced but even that won't make it in modern economics. The future is in something that we haven't seen yet.

[the_sunship]

Bitcoin is about the network, not just "it's a good idea but we can make something better."

Sure, you can always make something better, but once a network is in place and enough people are using something, the network effect takes over and it has it's own momentum.

Look at automobiles. We've been wanting to get off of gas and oil since 1972 but nothing has really changed much - why? People are used to the system that was agreed upon many years ago when Henry Ford was still around. The "system" can last a LONG time, although the cars change and radically improve.

Some people would also say that cable internet could be much better and we have the technology to do something far better at this point. Yes it's true, but there's no incentive as of now to totally overhaul the system.

However, the monetary system DOES have a need for change. It's quite obvious. And people want the change, and are willing (as we all are) to risk our savings on this new idea. If you have billions or trillions of dollars invested in the bitcoin system, what's going to be the incentive to get everyone to move over to another system? The network will get stronger by the year as more people are involved.

Also, you miss the point that bitcoin can be improved. We aren't even on version 1 yet. So the clunky bitcoin system of today may not at all look like the sleek and shiny bitcoin system of a few years from now. Certainly the more people use bitcoin, the more needs there will be for services which are based around the bitcoin system, like the automobile. The whole thing feeds itself. 

[kkaspar]

Bitcoin is about the network, not just "it's a good idea but we can make something better."
Sure, you can always make something better, but once a network is in place and enough people are using something, the network effect takes over and it has it's own momentum.

Bitcoin is meant to be an financial tool, not social media where the communication network of regular people creates success. Financial tools are mostly controlled by people who won't stay in competition when they use outdated tools just because they are used to it. In another words, it doesn't mater that User1 likes to talk to User2 about "bitcoin to the moon" and how his couple of thousand dollars worth of investment is doing.

Look at automobiles. We've been wanting to get off of gas and oil since 1972 but nothing has really changed much - why? People are used to the system that was agreed upon many years ago when Henry Ford was still around. The "system" can last a LONG time, although the cars change and radically improve.

Actually we haven't gotten off fossil fuels because we don't know how to extract energy this effectively with anything else. What is important is the ratio of energy needed to extract more energy. Nuclear, solar, wind power aren't serious enough alternatives because a lot more energy has to be used on creating conditions on extracting energy with these methods. Digging for fossil fuels still needs less energy then anything else, and that is why the world is mostly dependent on fossil fuels. The system hasn't changed because people aren't able to change it, not because they are just used to it. The main goal of scientific projects like CERN's LHC is to find new ways to extract energy. So people do try hard, but  sadly, still no success.

Some people would also say that cable internet could be much better and we have the technology to do something far better at this point. Yes it's true, but there's no incentive as of now to totally overhaul the system.

Cable internet could be improved and it is in fact constantly improving. Broadband speed is constantly increasing in parallel to the services released that make use of that bandwidth. Telecommunication is progressing fast, so it's a weird example to bring up when talking about stagnating things.

However, the monetary system DOES have a need for change. It's quite obvious. And people want the change, and are willing (as we all are) to risk our savings on this new idea. If you have billions or trillions of dollars invested in the bitcoin system, what's going to be the incentive to get everyone to move over to another system? The network will get stronger by the year as more people are involved.

Yes, it has to be changed. But it is childish to think that something this simplistic and flawed as bitcoin can actually replace it. The thing is that monetary systems have to go private, so free-competition will decide the success of different systems. The problem with the current monetary system is that free-competition doesn't apply and state law determines the system that people have to use. Without competition, the incentive for quality improvement is very low, so the quality of the current system(s) is also low.

Also, you miss the point that bitcoin can be improved. We aren't even on version 1 yet. So the clunky bitcoin system of today may not at all look like the sleek and shiny bitcoin system of a few years from now. Certainly the more people use bitcoin, the more needs there will be for services which are based around the bitcoin system, like the automobile. The whole thing feeds itself.  

I know that bitcoin can be improved, but studying the history of improvements, I think that progression is very slow. So slow that when a serious organization decides to use it's skills and resources to create their own alternative, then BTC won't have a chance. And I also understand that core financial properties, like the system that runs the inflow of new money (what I consider overly simplistic and flawed), won't ever be changed with bitcoin.

[Lloydie]

However, the monetary system DOES have a need for change. It's quite obvious. And people want the change, and are willing (as we all are) to risk our savings on this new idea. If you have billions or trillions of dollars invested in the bitcoin system, what's going to be the incentive to get everyone to move over to another system? The network will get stronger by the year as more people are involved.

Yes, it has to be changed. But it is childish to think that something this simplistic and flawed as bitcoin can actually replace it. The thing is that monetary systems have to go private, so free-competition will decide the success of different systems. The problem with the current monetary system is that free-competition doesn't apply and state law determines the system that people have to use. Without competition, the incentive for quality improvement is very low, so the quality of the current system(s) is also low.

Also, you miss the point that bitcoin can be improved. We aren't even on version 1 yet. So the clunky bitcoin system of today may not at all look like the sleek and shiny bitcoin system of a few years from now. Certainly the more people use bitcoin, the more needs there will be for services which are based around the bitcoin system, like the automobile. The whole thing feeds itself.  

I know that bitcoin can be improved, but studying the history of improvements, I think that progression is very slow. So slow that when a serious organization decides to use it's skills and resources to create their own alternative, then BTC won't have a chance. And I also understand that core financial properties, like the system that runs the inflow of new money (what I consider overly simplistic and flawed), won't ever be changed with bitcoin.

State law defines the currency in which you have to pay taxes, however it does not define what currency you are allowed to use.  At least not yet.

I can't see any "serious" organization able to create a competitive coin to Btc at the moment.  The banks? Government?  All too centralized.

The core financial properties of bitcoin looks okay to me, apart from the public ledger being public.  If Bitcoin is so overly simplistic and flawed, I suggest you build your own coin and let the free markets decide which coin it wants to use, right? 

That's the beauty of it all, if you don't like it then don't use it.  Go use something else you think is better.  Go to another forum and promote your own coin.  No point being all superior and saying Bitcoin is bad and will crash etc...

AFAIK, you have one week left before your crash predictions are proven totally imaginary.

[Davyd05]

China is "done"?  So, like, no Chinese people will ever invest in Bitcoin again?  Lol.

Offcourse they could come back,I would like it.
But the impact they had in November is over.

not sure if you got the memo.. but huobi has like 51% market share of the volume traded... and they are Chinese.. so uh.. Just thought I'd point that out lol, not that gox isn't leading the price.

[Bitcopia]

If the idea of an privatized monetary system really proves itself, then what stops companies like google to amass an army of talented software engineers to create a crypto that is faster, more secure and more user-friendly then bitcoin? I think that it is silly to think that Bitcoin will be able to compete with future coins. it's like saying 14 years ago that Napster is the future of music distribution.

Bitcoin is distributed consensus. The financial aspect of bitcoin is just the first system to attract infrastructure beyond mining. It's difficult to imagine a private company (such as Google) amassing hoards of other independent individuals and companies to run nodes and build services for their centralized crypto. The fact that bitcoin is at its heart a distributed consensus protocol that solves the Byzantine General's problem is too often overlooked. Money is not THE point of bitcoin. It is ONE point of bitcoin.

As far as competing with alt coins. Consider the network effect. TCP/IP is still the backbone of the internet today even though the protocol itself is not flexible. Systems and languages were/ are built on top of it. This is what is happening/ will happen with bitcoin.

[kkaspar]

State law defines the currency in which you have to pay taxes, however it does not define what currency you are allowed to use.  At least not yet.

Yes, you can also use multiple currencies, but Legal Tender regulations regarding taxes, debts and public charges are enough to enforce people and businesses to use the the legal currency. In theory, you could refuse legal tender in US for sales, but you probably would be out of business pretty soon.

I can't see any "serious" organization able to create a competitive coin to Btc at the moment.  The banks? Government?  All too centralized.

I can't see any serious organizations getting into the crypto game either. I think that there are two possible reasons: a) Development is being done out of public sight ... b) The idea of private monetary systems is still too unstable and raw and further studies need to be done to compose a solid vision of the development process.

The core financial properties of bitcoin looks okay to me, apart from the public ledger being public.  If Bitcoin is so overly simplistic and flawed, I suggest you build your own coin and let the free markets decide which coin it wants to use, right?  

The core financial properties mostly look okay to those whose main interest in bitcoin is to gain wealth by buying low and selling high. The increasing deflation of bitcoin seems very ok to those whose goal is speculation.
I think that it is a nice suggestion that I should build my own coin. But sadly I don't have the time or resources to even compete with bitcoin, not to mention the probable upcoming coins that bitcoin won't be able to compete with.

That's the beauty of it all, if you don't like it then don't use it.  Go use something else you think is better.  Go to another forum and promote your own coin.  No point being all superior and saying Bitcoin is bad and will crash etc...

Well, this is not exactly the first time when I was told to leave if I refuse to sing the same song of Bitcoin's Never-ending Success. But no, I wont leave, because I still consider the topic interesting and there are also people in the community who have interesting thoughts and who are not cheer-leading with religious fanaticism.
When the majority of the community tries to drive those away who think different or who criticize the mainstream knowledge, then the community can't be considered very progressive.

AFAIK, you have one week left before your crash predictions are proven totally imaginary.

It may come as a shock but predictions are imaginary. Predictions, or in this case speculations, can't be perceived with empirical proof and are theoretical in nature.
Also, one of my main points was that the Bitcoin market is highly manipulated and the wealth is highly concentrated, what makes the market highly unpredictable. I don't know how deep are he pockets of those in control or if their reach goes far enough to present false market data at the exchanges. Factors like that are important when speculating the future price at the bitcoin market. My speculations were done for entertainment, by considering the history of previous manipulation methods used, not for serious financial analysis. The unpredictable nature has led me to believe that I probably won't invest back before a similar situation emerges then we saw at the end of October where bigger plans of pumps are set in motion. And it wouldn't irritate me if the price will rise during this period, because to me it is the same as to get upset from observing the roulette table and cursing at yourself "Only if I would have put my money on red, I could have won...". Gambling is still gambling, even if you would have won..

Bitcoin is distributed consensus. The financial aspect of bitcoin is just the first system to attract infrastructure beyond mining. It's difficult to imagine a private company (such as Google) amassing hoards of other independent individuals and companies to run nodes and build services for their centralized crypto. The fact that bitcoin is at its heart a distributed consensus protocol that solves the Byzantine General's problem is too often overlooked. Money is not THE point of bitcoin. It is ONE point of bitcoin.

As far as competing with alt coins. Consider the network effect. TCP/IP is still the backbone of the internet today even though the protocol itself is not flexible. Systems and languages were/ are built on top of it. This is what is happening/ will happen with bitcoin.

When private companies like Google amass the software engineering talent needed to create a crypto that has clear quality advantages over bitcoin, then all the investors and supporters would come without google needing to amass them. Even Google brand value is important enough that if they would release a Googlecoin that is actually just another software clone of bitcoin, even then most of the money in bitcoin would quickly flow to the new googlecoin. Those who believe in bitcoin like it was their religion, tend to forget that serious investors are not like them and don't have any loyalty to bitcoin like they do. All their funds will quickly flow to the coin that has the best marketing potential.

It is out of place to compare Bitcoin to TCP/IP. TCP/IP was successful because it didn't have any important flaws in it's core, that should've been addressed. Not to mention that changing the internet protocol, without conflicting the existing system is a very hard task. But for value to flow from one crypto to another, just takes a week of transfers. And there really isn't a lot of development of important software that are built on the bitcoin protocol. Most important things that are build on top of bitcoin are the support services, but those support services are not dependent of bitcoin and can switch cryptos quickly when it is profitable to do so.

[Lloydie]

I think that it is a nice suggestion that I should build my own coin. But sadly I don't have the time or resources to even compete with bitcoin, not to mention the probable upcoming coins that bitcoin won't be able to compete with.

That's the beauty of it all, if you don't like it then don't use it.  Go use something else you think is better.  Go to another forum and promote your own coin.  No point being all superior and saying Bitcoin is bad and will crash etc...

Well, this is not exactly the first time when I was told to leave if I refuse to sing the same song of Bitcoin's Never-ending Success. But no, I wont leave, because I still consider the topic interesting and there are also people in the community who have interesting thoughts and who are not cheer-leading with religious fanaticism.
When the majority of the community tries to drive those away who think different or who criticize the mainstream knowledge, then the community can't be considered very progressive.

AFAIK, you have one week left before your crash predictions are proven totally imaginary.

It may come as a shock but predictions are imaginary. Predictions, or in this case speculations, can't be perceived with empirical proof and are theoretical in nature.
Also, one of my main points was that the Bitcoin market is highly manipulated and the wealth is highly concentrated, what makes the market highly unpredictable. I don't know how deep are he pockets of those in control or if their reach goes far enough to present false market data at the exchanges. Factors like that are important when speculating the future price at the bitcoin market. My speculations were done for entertainment, by considering the history of previous manipulation methods used, not for serious financial analysis. The unpredictable nature has led me to believe that I probably won't invest back before a similar situation emerges then we saw at the end of October where bigger plans of pumps are set in motion. And it wouldn't irritate me if the price will rise during this period, because to me it is the same as to get upset from observing the roulette table and cursing at yourself "Only if I would have put my money on red, I could have won...". Gambling is still gambling, even if you would have won..


The irony is lost on you! You criticise Btc yet you are willing to gamble on it.

You say it is flawed yet you don't offer a better alternative. Did satoshi whinge about fiat currencies? No, he did something about it.

You make false predictions and say you are happy with it.

My friend, when are you going to offer solutions?!?

If you don't have any, take a hint: gtfo.

[kkaspar]

The irony is lost on you! You criticise Btc yet you are willing to gamble on it.

You say it is flawed yet you don't offer a better alternative. Did satoshi whinge about fiat currencies? No, he did something about it.

You make false predictions and say you are happy with it.

My friend, when are you going to offer solutions?!?

If you don't have any, take a hint: gtfo.

I'm not criticizing bitcoin as an gambling platform. I think that it is fun to gamble at the bitcoin market with reasonable size bets. I was criticizing bitcoin more for the inability to be anything more then gambling.

Well it may come as a shock again, but you can actually criticize without being able to create an alternative. Places like edmunds.com don't actually have to create cars to review the low quality of an certain car.
Your rhetoric was slightly amusing, but I think that this is where our conversation stops. You keep up your buying/hodling/cheering and I'll continue to weaken the illusions of never-ending growth.

[Ibian]

never-ending growth.

Nobody has said this. It's going to top out eventually at which point the price will be stable.

[adpinbr]

no one is talking about never ending growth. the fact that you attribute a price of 10 dollars reasonable but 10 thousand unreasonable just shows how ridiculous your logic is and what a troll you are. stop talking bitcoin value terms,i know thats what gets everyone hard here but it is irrelevant. is the cryptographic asset class worth 10 billion? I think 1 trillion is a low ball estimate, especially due to the incoming haircuts and aggressive tax prosecution. gold is worth 5 trillion and it does nothing but sit in a vault. stfu and stop spreading fud

[Lloydie]

no one is talking about never ending growth. the fact that you attribute a price of 10 dollars reasonable but 10 thousand unreasonable just shows how ridiculous your logic is and what a troll you are. stop talking bitcoin value terms,i know thats what gets everyone hard here but it is irrelevant. is the cryptographic asset class worth 10 billion? I think 1 trillion is a low ball estimate, especially due to the incoming haircuts and aggressive tax prosecution. gold is worth 5 trillion and it does nothing but sit in a vault. stfu and stop spreading fud

+1

[DPoS]

bitcoin's functionality is sound, but price discovery is infant.

there is a serious quandary with arbitrage in that bitcoin trades locally sorta like gasoline prices but can be sent around the world instantly but gasoline can't.  So one-way arbs is a plague that will keep disrupting price discovery (since bots like to react to other exchanges even though the price can only affect one-way)

there is no BIS for bitcoin exchanges that can settle money between them..  I doubt one would be permitted (AML laws, etc)

I think the next innovation will have to be some of the early adopters to pool some of their vast btc and create a fund that is much larger than the exchanges with a wide spread..something bigger and more stoic than coinbase for example where they will be invested in the overall fund and also receive fees so as not to think they are selling all their btc too cheaply

just a thought...  seems the next step is needed here.