Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 05:00:51 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 [952] 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2013881 times)
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 899


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:03:46 PM
 #19021

Store of value function is a consequence of future economic relevance.

People store their wealth in stocks because they assume companies will have an economic relevance in the future. In gold because they assume that gold will have an economic relevance in the future. In BTC because they assume the network will have a future economic relevance.

Gold isn't the only SOV, it's just happens to be the one with the lower risk over long period, hence its popularity.

BTC will eat a good chunk of the SOV market and will probably remplace gold, but it will not become the only means to transfer value into the future.
1511542851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511542851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511542851
Reply with quote  #2

1511542851
Report to moderator
1511542851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511542851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511542851
Reply with quote  #2

1511542851
Report to moderator
1511542851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511542851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511542851
Reply with quote  #2

1511542851
Report to moderator
"Your bitcoin is secured in a way that is physically impossible for others to access, no matter for what reason, no matter how good the excuse, no matter a majority of miners, no matter what." -- gmaxwell
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511542851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511542851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511542851
Reply with quote  #2

1511542851
Report to moderator
1511542851
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511542851

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511542851
Reply with quote  #2

1511542851
Report to moderator
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2408



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:03:53 PM
 #19022

I wonder if you could use the current CPU temperature to the first or second decimal place as a source of entropy.

The least significant bit of a 16 bit audio sample always seemed a good idea to me.

The nice thing about randomness: you can mix many sources (using xor or whatever) and you'll not lose anything even if one source is bad.

Unfortunately what you may get wrong if you are too careless about this is how much useful randomness you have.

If I recall correctly some sources in the Linux kernel rng are added to the pool but counted as zero entropy.


this is why understanding the inner workings of predifined rng's or procedure calls to generate entropy is essential.

Also making sure that entropy is explicitly used properly is key. Simply make sure entropy is being used for what it is being generated for.

Somebody should code  up an entropy "meter"  to go in the menu bar of Linux   distros.

This would be interesting to see as well as a current list of entropy sources.

At some point you only need so much entropy from real world randomness but it is cool to come up with new ideas on ways to generate even more randomness.

I have suggested somewhere on reddit (although I can't find it now) to found the "church of random", where prayer nodes send around random data as prayers and randomness is collected to build "cathedrals" from it. While the main focus was to get religious protection for sending encrypted random data, those prayers could certainly also be used as a source for randomness.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
Melbustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1638



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:16:41 PM
 #19023

Store of value function is a consequence of future economic relevance.

People store their wealth in stocks because they assume companies will have an economic relevance in the future. In gold because they assume that gold will have an economic relevance in the future. In BTC because they assume the network will have a future economic relevance.

Gold isn't the only SOV, it's just happens to be the one with the lower risk over long period, hence its popularity.

BTC will eat a good chunk of the SOV market, but it will not become the only means to transfer value in the future.


It's funny that gold is perceived as low risk. I think that perception inverts at some point. Given that gold no longer has any direct connection whatsoever to our monetary system or day-to-day economy, it sounds incredibly risky to me. There's no functional demand underpinning its value beyond the $300/oz (or whatever) of industrial-use demand, and it's a huge pain to actually manage ownership of it.

Bitcoin is the first monetary system to credibly offer perfect information to all economic participants.
Cryptoasset rankings and metrics for investors: http://onchainfx.com
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:24:58 PM
 #19024

I am not taking about buying altcoins but about buying networks (via appcoin). Two networks which are not on the same market aren't competitors. Bitcoin is a competitor with Litecoin since they are both payment system network. But Bitcoin isn't a competitor which MaidSafe or Storj since the two latter are aiming to solve an entirely different problem than Bitcoin.

Your argument is like saying that Bitcoin will kill Facebook because there can only be one network in the economy because of the network effect. No, the network effect entails only one network per market. There are a lot of markets in the economy, and Bitcoin will not address all the market of the economy.

I see where you're coming from but IMO this is where your argument falls short :

Concerning his argument that the appcoin will be dumped by the users as soon as they have finish to use the network: then how does he explain that bitcoins have value? Of course bitcoins have value because people use the token of the BTC network as both a store of value and a vehicle to speculate on the fact that the demand for the use of the network will skyrocket. Why do they do that? Because of the limited supply of the BTC tokens, not because bitcoins are the equivalent of cash and people want to have them to enjoy future random opportunities.

Bitcoin, as money, aspires to become the most easily exchangeable good so that it can be traded for any goods or services on the market. For that reason Bitcoin is absolutely held, to some extent, because of its ability to be saved and maintain in exchange value so as to satisfy "future random opportunities" (the very definition of a SOV).

Now Storjcoin, as an appcoin, only serves one purpose which is to (afaik) use storage capabilities of the Storj network.

One will not hold Storjcoin to satisfy future storage needs. Presumably they will hold BTC and exchange for Storjcoin only when they want to use the Storj network.

Given the frictionless nature of this exchange it is reasonable to assume that most people will prefer holding the more valuable, liquid asset instead of one that is restricted to use in only one market(network).

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:39:46 PM
 #19025

No one is saying  that the app won't have value as in Storj or Maidsafe. It's the appcoin that will trend towards 0 as BTC is held until only when one needs to utilize appcoin. Eventually, you might as well just use BTC instead of appcoin and the devs will probably come to this realization . 

Instead of issuing appcoins, the devs should issue stock. Then it would be fair.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:46:53 PM
 #19026

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:53:20 PM
 #19027

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

||▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
[]|
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 08:57:50 PM
 #19028

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

I'd also laugh my ass off if Obama would come on TV and announce the USD is getting converted into BTC. Not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in economic history for me to see so many "Nobel prizes" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 09:05:33 PM
 #19029

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

How could they as most of them have not guaranteed a fixed supply nor will function as a neutral SOV for an undefined purpose.
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 09:11:19 PM
 #19030

What incentive do I have to hold appcoinx to store value when BTC promises better return & better liquidity
Diversification.

Why investors have a portfolio of stocks instead of just having the stock that has the better risk/reward?

This is not diversification.

These are all eggs of the same basket (cryptoSOV).

Network effect dictates only one egg can survive. There is no comparison with stocks.

That is exactly diversification.


lebing
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1288

Enabling the maximal migration


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 09:13:59 PM
 #19031

out of curiosity to the security experts here.

which do you consider more secure, Armory or Trezor?

I'm not a security expert, but I would say trezor (with passphrase).

It's also easier to use securely.


Trezor seems safe. A simple paper wallet generated offline on a new computer running linux is safe too  Wink

the problem with a paper wallet is to spend the coins safely.
An average bitcoin user these days isn't able to create a linux live CD, import a private key, export the transaction by USB and broadcast it on another online computer running a full node.

Exactly. Like I said above: trezor (with additional passphrase against theft of seed backup) is quite secure, but most importantly: it's both easy to use securely (hard to fuck up) and very convenient. I use it as a day-to-day wallet (plus mycelium on the phone)


Has anybody noticed that Bitcoin actually has the potential to eliminate theft, like, for real?

more or less.


Bro, do you even blockchain?
-E Voorhees
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 09:18:43 PM
 #19032

What incentive do I have to hold appcoinx to store value when BTC promises better return & better liquidity
Diversification.

Why investors have a portfolio of stocks instead of just having the stock that has the better risk/reward?

This is not diversification.

These are all eggs of the same basket (cryptoSOV).

Network effect dictates only one egg can survive. There is no comparison with stocks.

That is exactly diversification.

I'm sorry but I don't believe that purchasing assets subject to the same underlying risks is diversification.

Bitcoin, real estate, stocks, PM : sure

Bitcoin, Litecoin, Mastercoin, Storjcoin : not so

"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
NewLiberty
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


Gresham's Lawyer


View Profile WWW
December 27, 2014, 09:37:00 PM
 #19033

Store of value function is a consequence of future economic relevance.

People store their wealth in stocks because they assume companies will have an economic relevance in the future. In gold because they assume that gold will have an economic relevance in the future. In BTC because they assume the network will have a future economic relevance.

Gold isn't the only SOV, it's just happens to be the one with the lower risk over long period, hence its popularity.

BTC will eat a good chunk of the SOV market, but it will not become the only means to transfer value in the future.
It's funny that gold is perceived as low risk. I think that perception inverts at some point. Given that gold no longer has any direct connection whatsoever to our monetary system or day-to-day economy, it sounds incredibly risky to me. There's no functional demand underpinning its value beyond the $300/oz (or whatever) of industrial-use demand, and it's a huge pain to actually manage ownership of it.

The risk of gold has a lot to do with its physical properties.  In the Egyptian pyramids, the gold (that hadn't been plundered) was just as it was when it was put there.  Most everything else was ravaged by time.  The small silver chains had become silver oxide dust, even most of the language was lost to antiquity and great effort has gone into decyphering its meanings with moderate success.

BIS still lists gold as an Tier 1 asset for central banks that use the option to do so.  The other tier 1 assets are mostly other central bank currencies and form the SDRs for inter-central bank settlements.  We aren't handing it back and forth to buy and sell stuff, but the central banks sometimes still do so.

FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 09:40:36 PM
 #19034

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

How could they as most of them have not guaranteed a fixed supply nor will function as a neutral SOV for an undefined purpose.

how could they not have guaranteed a fixed supply? the vast majority do have a fixed supply enforced by mathematics. creation of a new alt does not expand the number of coins in any other network. can you define "neutral store of value"? storing value is the defined purpose if that is what the main/only function is.. so how can it be a "store of value for an undefined purpose" if the very purpose is to store value <- this statement is contradictory to itself..

||▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
[]|
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 10:01:48 PM
 #19035

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

How could they as most of them have not guaranteed a fixed supply nor will function as a neutral SOV for an undefined purpose.

how could they not have guaranteed a fixed supply? the vast majority do have a fixed supply enforced by mathematics. creation of a new alt does not expand the number of coins in any other network. can you define "neutral store of value"? storing value is the defined purpose if that is what the main/only function is.. so how can it be a "store of value for an undefined purpose" if the very purpose is to store value <- this statement is contradictory to itself..


I don't know all the altcoins and appcoins but I have seen plenty examples of how this promise has been violate,  like with Ripple. Bitshares has morphed itself like 3x. That's because none of them has gotten big enough to piss off too many people.

By neutral, I mean that Bitcoin only has to function as money and nothing else to succeed massively.
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
December 27, 2014, 10:12:13 PM
 #19036

Nick Szabo has written an outstanding essay about the origins of money: http://szabo.best.vwh.net/shell.html
Krawisz is doing better work than Szabo these days:

http://nakamotoinstitute.org/reciprocal-altruism-in-the-theory-of-money/

(insert disclaimer referencing "shoulders of giants" here)
BldSwtTrs
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 899


View Profile
December 27, 2014, 10:19:44 PM
 #19037

Bitcoin, as money, aspires to become the most easily exchangeable good so that it can be traded for any goods or services on the market. For that reason Bitcoin is absolutely held, to some extent, because of its ability to be saved and maintain in exchange value so as to satisfy "future random opportunities" (the very definition of a SOV).

Now Storjcoin, as an appcoin, only serves one purpose which is to (afaik) use storage capabilities of the Storj network.

One will not hold Storjcoin to satisfy future storage needs. Presumably they will hold BTC and exchange for Storjcoin only when they want to use the Storj network.

Given the frictionless nature of this exchange it is reasonable to assume that most people will prefer holding the more valuable, liquid asset instead of one that is restricted to use in only one market(network).
If this model were true then nobody would hold something else than cash.
But people hold stocks which are less liquid than cash and which you cannot exchange against goods.

Appcoins really are just shares of a network as stocks are shares of companies. If a company creates value then its shares are valuable, if a network creates value then its shares will be valuable too. The only difference is that the company earns profits and give them out whereas the value created by a nertwork inflates directly the value of its tokens.

Cypherdoc you are right the limited supply of appcoins is questionnable but it's the same things with stocks. There are not good long term store of value but can be good medium tem store of value and speculative vehicles if managed actively. You cannot buy facebook shares or maidsafecoins and come back 20 years later whereas you can do that with BTC.
kodtycoon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 10:21:28 PM
 #19038

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

How could they as most of them have not guaranteed a fixed supply nor will function as a neutral SOV for an undefined purpose.

how could they not have guaranteed a fixed supply? the vast majority do have a fixed supply enforced by mathematics. creation of a new alt does not expand the number of coins in any other network. can you define "neutral store of value"? storing value is the defined purpose if that is what the main/only function is.. so how can it be a "store of value for an undefined purpose" if the very purpose is to store value <- this statement is contradictory to itself..


I don't know all the altcoins and appcoins but I have seen plenty examples of how this promise has been violate,  like with Ripple. Bitshares has morphed itself like 3x. That's because none of them has gotten big enough to piss off too many people.

By neutral, I mean that Bitcoin only has to function as money and nothing else to succeed massively.

its only a tiny fraction of coins that can increase the number of coins. the vast majority cant do that and never have or should i say it is possible with a fork or something but that would ultimately be the downfall of the coin - bitcoin is no different in regards to increasing supply. the fact that bitcoin can only ever act as a form of currency could be the very reason another coin over takes it - not that it would happen any time soon but you cant exactly say its impossible. acting as only money is not a prerequisite for success. the only reason bitcoin has that luxury of only needing to act as money is due to its 6 year head start to anything innovative enough to challenge it and bitcoin being the first of its kind. whether that head start can keep it ahead 10 years from now is any ones guess.. these second gen coins - not just app coins, theres a big difference - could eventually evolve and innovate enough to become challengers to the crypto status quo.

||▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
▄▄▀▀▀▀▄            ▄▀▀▀▀▄▄
█▀▀▄   ▀▀▄      ▄▀▀   ▄███
█   █▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▀▀   ▄██████
█   █  ▀▀▄      ▄█████████
█   █     ▀▀▄▄██████▀▀████
█   █        ████▀  ▄▄████
█   █        █▀  ▄▄███████
█   █         ▄▄████▀▀████
█    ▀▄      ████▀  ▄▄████
 ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄   █▀  ▄█████▀▀
    ▀▀▄   ▀▀▄▄▄█████▀▀
       ▀▀▄   ████▀▀
          ▀▀▄█▀▀
[]|
smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 10:22:26 PM
 #19039

What incentive do I have to hold appcoinx to store value when BTC promises better return & better liquidity
Diversification.

Why investors have a portfolio of stocks instead of just having the stock that has the better risk/reward?

This is not diversification.

These are all eggs of the same basket (cryptoSOV).

Network effect dictates only one egg can survive. There is no comparison with stocks.

That is exactly diversification.

I'm sorry but I don't believe that purchasing assets subject to the same underlying risks is diversification.

Bitcoin, real estate, stocks, PM : sure

Bitcoin, Litecoin, Mastercoin, Storjcoin : not so

If one accepts the "only one egg can survive" theory, then you have nearly perfect negative correlation between the assets (at least when you buy only two of them, one being the most likely survivor and one being the strongest alt; if you buy more it becomes more complex, but still diversification). The is exactly what you want for ideal diversification.

I don't think you understand the concept at all.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
December 27, 2014, 10:28:41 PM
 #19040

Sure, appcoins will probably have some value but it will degrade over time, just like frequent flyer miles as they will inevitably be inflated away through promises broken.

i am guna laugh my god damn ass off if an "app coin" as you call them ever over takes bitcoin lol im not saying its likely, just that it would be the most hilarious event in crypto history for me to see so many "wise men" proven wrong all in one go Cheesy

How could they as most of them have not guaranteed a fixed supply nor will function as a neutral SOV for an undefined purpose.

The way this would happen is if one of them became extremely useful and popular first. Then it would be so widely used and accepted that it could start to be used as money by others even if they had no direct interest in the underlying service. It really wouldn't take a lot for something to become more widely used than bitcoin at this point.

I don't really see this happening with something like storj (too limited in application), but something like ethereum or perhaps maidsafe has the (long shot) potential to develop in that manner.
Pages: « 1 ... 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 [952] 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 ... 1558 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!