And thus, of course, you also sincerely hope no one will actually listen to what you advocate here and act on it?
Part of me wants that yes. But I would've felt guilty had I not warned everyone and told them the way out of this Ponzi scheme. I feel better now, and still hoping to get away with as much cash as I could.
Dude, pretty much every one of your points is founded on the wildly incorrect premise that some other currency is fixed and stable in some way. No currency in use today has this "anchor" that you seem to think is so important.
Really? I don't remember the last time my electricity bill skyrocketed 10 times in a month.
People want to consume goods and are willing to spend their coins for it at some price (amount of goods). The lower the price, the higher the time preference. Also, why would you ever be able to buy bitcoins? Clearly some people want to trade bitcoins even at $7. But no, those people are idiots.
With the exception of people being forced to sell their coins for an emergency and the exception of "hit-and-run" transactions, most buyers buy now on hope that the coin's price will rise and most sellers on the expectation that it will drop. How otherwise can you justify a ten-fold increase in a single month? It wasn't a sudden surge in child porn anonymous sales I suppose. No, it was speculation. Virtually the whole bitcoin market is speculation
Suggester also doesn't understand what marginal utility is.... hoarding and increasing your stockpile doesn't make sense into infinity because as you increase the amount you have, the less utility you are acquiring.
Hmm, I wonder how we ended up with quite a few millionaires and billionares on this planet then. Weird. Perhaps they don't understand marginal utility either. Why don't you explain it to them DrSammy? Maybe they'll give up their hoarded money to charity.
Also, the higher the value, the more you can buy with it, and the more you can buy with it, the more incentive you have to spend it. Yes, some people have really low time preference, and so they save their bitcoins. But everybody has a price. At some price, they will spend their bitcoins, thus increasing their availability and lowering the amount people are willing to pay for coins certis paribus . Supply/Demand.
I'm pretty tired of having to repeat this, but let's say it one more time: Yes they will sell at some point, but to another investor who'll keep the coins till the price is right before selling them again
. That's a Ponzi scheme by definition.
Stability is important, not the particular % of growth in the money supply.
That just shows you understood nothing of what I said. Stability doesn't come except with a supply proportionate to the demand. Otherwise you'll continue to see these roller coaster prices and/or perpetual deflation.
Hey, I'm a software engineer who after seeing all the constant posts on Slashdot about bitcoins, decided to come see what all the fuss was about. After reading the FAQ, I immediately wanted to come and make a post containing the exact points that "Suggester" has made.
You didn't even need to see the historical price graph to figure the current design has issues? I see you're smarter than quite a few folks here
As a potential user who is "late to the game" I see a system that hugely favors the early adopters--it just doesn't come off as "fair", and as such, I'm not too anxious to get involved. Why should the early adopters be rewarded with incredible wealth while I get a pittance?
You join now on the hope that in a year or two you'll be a relatively "early adopter" and then grab a new "late adopter's" cash for your coins which would be even scarcer by then. In other words: Pyramid Scheme
What's the incentive for early adopters to promote and use bitcoin?
The incentive is to get other fools to join the pyramid so they can fatten their wallet even more before running away with their money.
I wouldn't dismiss bitcoins as a currency because these perceived "flaws" just yet. From what i see, its commonly mentioned that early adopters are rewarded disproportionately, its a pyramid scheme, etc, but as posters has noted already, these complaints completely discount the huge risk that early adopters are bearing. If you speculate on something that fails, you lose, and its hard to tell if something will win or lose when its just getting off the ground. The reward should be proportionate to the risk taken. Starting a new currency like bitcoins is a huge risk in terms of success or failure, it's something most people would consider impossible and or/a waste of time. I think its brilliant that early adopters have a chance of big rewards, it gives new comers great incentive to get involved with using or earning coins NOW - to catch the wave - so to speak. Removing this incentive means there is less interest in this new money, and less growth.
Another great definition for a Ponzi scheme. And totally true. I mean, the first few people purchasing the ticket are indeed taking more risk since the scheme isn't popularized just yet! The only problem with that, however, is that with bitcoin everyone is an "early adopter" at some point if he holds on to his coins long enough (as long as the system didn't collapse yet).
it, once speculation stops being so novel, and mining stops being so profitable, it will start being used the way it was intended, because there really is no better use.
I explicitly outlined in the first post why that scenario would be much worse than the current one. You're hoping for the total removal of the electricity-cost anchor. That's a nightmare.
This is not to say that getting in "late" is bad though. Mining is not the only way to make coin, trading goods and services is an excellent way to earn your way into the economy.
You forgot to add: "provided the coins' price doesn't drop in half before you get the chance to sell/reuse them".
If you have a deflationary growth economy, everybody win, even if you're a latecomer.
Unless enough people realize the trick and escape the ship before it sinks. But if we live in a world of zombies then sure, it won't fail until it snatches enough victims so that it has no space for any new naive newcomers. We're talking hundreds of millions of potentially stupid (or speculative) people.