Bitcoin or gold?

[overcoin]

If you had to convert all your wealth to either Bitcoin or gold and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that Bitcoin has only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.

I'll keep both gold and bitcoin. I've even proposed the first dual currency being bitcoin backed by gold.

[1715588409]

1715588409

[1715588409]

1715588409

[1715588409]

1715588409

[1715588409]

1715588409

[1715588409]

1715588409

[1715588409]

1715588409

[contro]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

[FasterStronger]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

agree)) I think it's better to ask in what proportion should you keep btc to gold as mostly use both

[roslinpl]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

Indeed
Much easier to keep

It is like gold in a code

[FlawlesskKng]

I'm still thinking about gold or bitcoin. Maybe after couple more information about currency at this moment i'll make a decision.
Have a nice day guys!

[AlexGR]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

Bitcoin is better than gold, as long as the NSA doesn't bring a few gazillionhashes/sec with an ASIC farm they own to gain 51% the network. All it'd take for the NSA is a ~50-100mn USD equipment contract with some ASIC manufacturer (which is peanuts for their standards).

Gold has no 51% attack problems or external uncertainties of what the NSA will do tomorrow. It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%, or what will happen if underseas mining start, or what will happen if gold can, at some point, by synthesized by low energy nuclear reactions etc.

[FastBluff]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

Bitcoin is better than gold, as long as the NSA doesn't bring a few gazillionhashes/sec with an ASIC farm they own to gain 51% the network. All it'd take for the NSA is a ~50-100mn USD equipment contract with some ASIC manufacturer (which is peanuts for their standards).

Gold has no 51% attack problems or external uncertainties of what the NSA will do tomorrow. It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%, or what will happen if underseas mining start, or what will happen if gold can, at some point, by synthesized by low energy nuclear reactions etc.

Why does everyone keep posting about the NSA taking over bitcoin. Am i missing something? There is NO WAY that one could achieve 51% of the mining rate. It would be absurd and overall and not cost effective as they would continually have to reinvest in equipment to maintain their mining rate.

[FalconFly]

Why does everyone keep posting about the NSA taking over bitcoin. Am i missing something? There is NO WAY that one could achieve 51% of the mining rate. It would be absurd and overall and not cost effective as they would continually have to reinvest in equipment to maintain their mining rate.

Although I don't see why they'd have the incentive to do that - getting the required Hashes/sec would be peanuts for them. Funding is a non-issue for them, if the government (or its owners) decide to do so. The FED may run out of ideas but will never runs out money to print. They could easily create entire companies just to develop and build literally unlimited amounts of high-end industrial mining gear for them, if that was decided to be done.
Cost effectiveness seriously is none of their business. Any action by them isn't about cost - they are supplied directly by the creators of the money (FED) and it's only about the damage they can deal if they're given a target.

I agree though, bitcoin is like a bug to them, it would be idiotic even by their standards to engage in such action. For as long as they are certain they can control it at any point they want, they'd rather assimilate it (which seems their current MO). Anything else, they'd rather work to regulate it to death or just make it illegal and proceed from there. After all, agencies like the NSA seek information and control, destroying a potentially useful vehicle isn't their MO.
With its present market cap and trade volume, BTC isn't even a mosquito on the windscreen of behemoths like Western Union, JPM, Deutsche, Barclays, GS and the likes.

[AlexGR]

Both, but bitcoin are better, easier to keep and to use : )

Bitcoin is better than gold, as long as the NSA doesn't bring a few gazillionhashes/sec with an ASIC farm they own to gain 51% the network. All it'd take for the NSA is a ~50-100mn USD equipment contract with some ASIC manufacturer (which is peanuts for their standards).

Gold has no 51% attack problems or external uncertainties of what the NSA will do tomorrow. It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%, or what will happen if underseas mining start, or what will happen if gold can, at some point, by synthesized by low energy nuclear reactions etc.

Why does everyone keep posting about the NSA taking over bitcoin. Am i missing something? There is NO WAY that one could achieve 51% of the mining rate. It would be absurd and overall and not cost effective as they would continually have to reinvest in equipment to maintain their mining rate.

As the poster earlier than me replied, their cost would be negligible at this point.

What's at stake here, is the hegemony of the USD. If Bitcoin becomes an increasingly popular alternative, they may take the order to break it. That would be last resort though because it would indicate massive panic on their side that would lead people to Gold & Silver with greater intensity than ever.

[Tjopper]

Both... never put your bets on 1 position!

[zimmah]

If you had to convert all your wealth to either Bitcoin or gold and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that Bitcoin has only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.

Bitcoin. Here is why

Let us go back 110 years to say 1904 and ask the following question: If you had to convert all your wealth to either horseless carriages (otherwise known as automobiles) or horses and keep it there for 10 years, which would you choose? Keep in mind the fact that horseless carriages have only been around for 5 years, and could be fundamentally different in any number of ways in 10 years.

By the way humans had been using horses as a primary form of transportation for millennia, yet in a period of 50 years between 1900 and 1950 they virtually vanished form the transportation scene. Will Bitcoin do the same to gold?

i don't think bitcoin will replace gold and silver, but it will be a new alternative to them.

[skilo]

It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%

Wouldn't less Gold production create more scarcity witch would make the gold even more valuable?

or what will happen if underseas mining start, or what will happen if gold can, at some point, by synthesized by low energy nuclear reactions etc.

I guess it's not impossible: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/gold-bacteria-toxic-ions_n_2616566.html

But for now Silver and gold are a good investment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wgosPXVWUM

[AlexGR]

It has however other types of uncertainties like what will happen to gold production if the energy prices are somehow down by 80-90%

Wouldn't less Gold production create more scarcity witch would make the gold even more valuable?

Yes in the hypothetical scenario of lower energy prices that translates to more gold production.

I guess it's not impossible: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/gold-bacteria-toxic-ions_n_2616566.html

But for now Silver and gold are a good investment.

That's actually more of a chemical reaction rather than a transmutation of elements, like we have in fission or fusion. But Gold and Silver are ALWAYS better than paper money. Paper money = scam.

[skilo]

I think a crypto backed by gold or silver would be a cool idea, But it would probably be hard to implement it, You would have to "Trust" someone with securely storing the physical gold and silver and the crypto would have to be redeemable so that anyone could request a withdraw of their physical gold and silver.

Not quite sure how it could work in the real world, It's just a silly idea that popped into my head.

[DANIEL77]

Both. I prefer diversify my investment!

[krishatnet]

In security gold is better than bitcoins.

[BTCalexxx2.0]

Are you people serious? You think Bitcoin is a alternative to real physical gold? You must be insane. Or do you think you can buy food for some digits when shit starts hitting the fan?

 

[Brangdon]

Seems the majority of bitcoinatics would turn into goldbugs if even the chance.

Few would recommend holding more in bitcoin than you can afford to lose. "All your wealth" is more than you can afford to lose.

I would go for gold. I'm very sure crypto-currencies will still be successful in 10 years, but I'm far less sure that Bitcoin will be the one. I'd guess there's a 20% chance it won't be, in which case it will probably crash to zero. Gold prices may drop, but not so low as that.

If the rules in the original post allowed me to transfer funds between different alt-coins during the 10 years, I might go for Bitcoin instead.

Why not buy silver? It's much cheaper than gold but still more valuable than fiat paper, Right now it takes about $21 to buy 1oz of silver.

That's at best irrelevant (since we have to hold it for 10 years), and at worst a liability as the weight and bulk of silver makes it harder to store and move high value amounts.

Also silver can be melted down and used to kill werewolves and that's something you cant do with gold or platinum.

I have to admit, that's part of the reason I have some silver.

[Qwerty777]

Bitcoin, Bitcoin and Bitcoin! Well, I am a person who like doing everything easily and fast and Gold is the instrument which is not so easy to use as a payment

[tinus42]

The gold and silver I have used to be worth more than my Bitcoins. But even though the Bitcoin price dropped after Mt.Gox my Bitcoins are now worth more than my PM's (also because gold and silver dropped in price last year).

Apart from a few millibits on exchanges my Bitcoins are in cold storage at a location far far away and thus not easily spendable (this also so I won't panic sell) so like with gold and silver I will keep holding on to them for now.