Bitcoin Forum
November 24, 2017, 04:22:04 AM *
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 ... 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 [1039] 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2013480 times)
Trader Steve
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 832


"How do you eat an elephant? One bit at a time..."


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:10:31 AM
 #20761

weaker currencies --> perceived stronger currencies (U.S. Dollar) --> bitcoin

I don't see metals as useful a currency as bitcoin but they will, of course, appreciate against a collapsing dollar - just not as much as bitcoin in my opinion. Bitcoin could be the safety valve that preserves some semblance of a global economy and a somewhat civilized society since it will allow the continued trade across distance (metals not so much).

You're complicating what should be a simple issue.  Resources are exchanged to benefit both transacting parties.  You're assuming people find Bitcoin valuable as opposed to food, shelter, visa cards, beanie babies, whatever.  Metals are more useful than Bitcoins in some circumstances.  Not so in others.  Same applies to credit cards, and so on.

Under what realistic circumstances would Bitcoin "preserve some semblance of a global economy"?

Bitcoin will likely be the final (or only) medium of exchange left that will enable people to trade for the food, shelter, etc. It will enable the global trade across distance to continue because it will be the only trusted currency that is not subject to the risk of being "backed" by the "full faith and credit" of bankrupt governments. It will allow the market economy to continue while preventing the total collapse into a barter economy. In short, it will save many from a lot of pain and suffering.



And what exactly is bitcoin 'backed' by? Coins and fiat are backed by physical governments and militia.    People can protest and throw rocks at politicians when shtf. You can't throw rocks online at miners maintaining the blockchains, or rogue exchange owners known only by internet screennames.

Are you assuming the masses will just put all their 'faith' into a non-reversible, non transparent system backed by anonymous neckbeards should the world crumble?

Sounds legit.

You make the same mistake I did before I learned economics. Bitcoin is not backed by anything - just like gold isn't. They are each valued for their individual characteristics and utility. Humans impute value - there is no such thing as "intrinsic" or "inherent" value.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511497324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511497324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511497324
Reply with quote  #2

1511497324
Report to moderator
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:17:53 AM
 #20762

weaker currencies --> perceived stronger currencies (U.S. Dollar) --> bitcoin

I don't see metals as useful a currency as bitcoin but they will, of course, appreciate against a collapsing dollar - just not as much as bitcoin in my opinion. Bitcoin could be the safety valve that preserves some semblance of a global economy and a somewhat civilized society since it will allow the continued trade across distance (metals not so much).

You're complicating what should be a simple issue.  Resources are exchanged to benefit both transacting parties.  You're assuming people find Bitcoin valuable as opposed to food, shelter, visa cards, beanie babies, whatever.  Metals are more useful than Bitcoins in some circumstances.  Not so in others.  Same applies to credit cards, and so on.

Under what realistic circumstances would Bitcoin "preserve some semblance of a global economy"?

Bitcoin will likely be the final (or only) medium of exchange left that will enable people to trade for the food, shelter, etc. It will enable the global trade across distance to continue because it will be the only trusted currency that is not subject to the risk of being "backed" by the "full faith and credit" of bankrupt governments. It will allow the market economy to continue while preventing the total collapse into a barter economy. In short, it will save many from a lot of pain and suffering.



And what exactly is bitcoin 'backed' by? Coins and fiat are backed by physical governments and militia.    People can protest and throw rocks at politicians when shtf. You can't throw rocks online at miners maintaining the blockchains, or rogue exchange owners known only by internet screennames.

Are you assuming the masses will just put all their 'faith' into a non-reversible, non transparent system backed by anonymous neckbeards should the world crumble?

Sounds legit.

You make the same mistake I did before I learned economics. Bitcoin is not backed by anything - just like gold isn't. They are each valued for their individual characteristics and utility. Humans impute value - there is no such thing as "intrinsic" or "inherent" value.



Perhaps bad wording on my part, as 'intrinsic value' has such a broad range of interpretation. 

I'll say 'utilitarian value.'  Even if gold's market value crashes to 0, it still won't be completely useless, as it can still be utilized in industrial/economic/decorative situations.

Now what usefulness would bitcoin present if its market value goes to nil?
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:19:16 AM
 #20763

How has the 'trust' factor worked out for bitcoin so far?.........

Very well I must say. In little over 5 years Bitcoin has managed to grow a market cap of over 1B$. Not so bad for a concept that is quite unlike anything this world has seen.

You "transparency" assertion is quite subjective and mostly disingenuous. I will not entertain an argument where one would propose the current financial system is more transparent than the world's biggest open source ledger.

Now please spare us the rest of your depressingly unoriginal idiocy and go back to the troll corner where you came from.  Smiley

"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
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:23:25 AM
 #20764

weaker currencies --> perceived stronger currencies (U.S. Dollar) --> bitcoin

I don't see metals as useful a currency as bitcoin but they will, of course, appreciate against a collapsing dollar - just not as much as bitcoin in my opinion. Bitcoin could be the safety valve that preserves some semblance of a global economy and a somewhat civilized society since it will allow the continued trade across distance (metals not so much).

You're complicating what should be a simple issue.  Resources are exchanged to benefit both transacting parties.  You're assuming people find Bitcoin valuable as opposed to food, shelter, visa cards, beanie babies, whatever.  Metals are more useful than Bitcoins in some circumstances.  Not so in others.  Same applies to credit cards, and so on.

Under what realistic circumstances would Bitcoin "preserve some semblance of a global economy"?

Bitcoin will likely be the final (or only) medium of exchange left that will enable people to trade for the food, shelter, etc. It will enable the global trade across distance to continue because it will be the only trusted currency that is not subject to the risk of being "backed" by the "full faith and credit" of bankrupt governments. It will allow the market economy to continue while preventing the total collapse into a barter economy. In short, it will save many from a lot of pain and suffering.



And what exactly is bitcoin 'backed' by? Coins and fiat are backed by physical governments and militia.    People can protest and throw rocks at politicians when shtf. You can't throw rocks online at miners maintaining the blockchains, or rogue exchange owners known only by internet screennames.

Are you assuming the masses will just put all their 'faith' into a non-reversible, non transparent system backed by anonymous neckbeards should the world crumble?

Sounds legit.

You make the same mistake I did before I learned economics. Bitcoin is not backed by anything - just like gold isn't. They are each valued for their individual characteristics and utility. Humans impute value - there is no such thing as "intrinsic" or "inherent" value.



Perhaps bad wording on my part, as 'intrinsic value' has such a broad range of interpretation.  

I'll say 'utilitarian value.'  Even if gold's market value crashes to 0, it still won't be completely useless, as it can still be utilized in industrial/economic/decorative situations.

Now what usefulness would bitcoin present if its market value goes to nil?

But that is not the argument you brought forth. Your original proposition is that money must be backed by something when in fact money is valued only for its characteristics and properties as store-of-value, currency and unit of account.

Gold's "industrial" value is irrelevant to this discussion.

"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
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:27:40 AM
 #20765

weaker currencies --> perceived stronger currencies (U.S. Dollar) --> bitcoin

I don't see metals as useful a currency as bitcoin but they will, of course, appreciate against a collapsing dollar - just not as much as bitcoin in my opinion. Bitcoin could be the safety valve that preserves some semblance of a global economy and a somewhat civilized society since it will allow the continued trade across distance (metals not so much).

You're complicating what should be a simple issue.  Resources are exchanged to benefit both transacting parties.  You're assuming people find Bitcoin valuable as opposed to food, shelter, visa cards, beanie babies, whatever.  Metals are more useful than Bitcoins in some circumstances.  Not so in others.  Same applies to credit cards, and so on.

Under what realistic circumstances would Bitcoin "preserve some semblance of a global economy"?

Bitcoin will likely be the final (or only) medium of exchange left that will enable people to trade for the food, shelter, etc. It will enable the global trade across distance to continue because it will be the only trusted currency that is not subject to the risk of being "backed" by the "full faith and credit" of bankrupt governments. It will allow the market economy to continue while preventing the total collapse into a barter economy. In short, it will save many from a lot of pain and suffering.



And what exactly is bitcoin 'backed' by? Coins and fiat are backed by physical governments and militia.    People can protest and throw rocks at politicians when shtf. You can't throw rocks online at miners maintaining the blockchains, or rogue exchange owners known only by internet screennames.

Are you assuming the masses will just put all their 'faith' into a non-reversible, non transparent system backed by anonymous neckbeards should the world crumble?

Sounds legit.

You make the same mistake I did before I learned economics. Bitcoin is not backed by anything - just like gold isn't. They are each valued for their individual characteristics and utility. Humans impute value - there is no such thing as "intrinsic" or "inherent" value.



Perhaps bad wording on my part, as 'intrinsic value' has such a broad range of interpretation.  

I'll say 'utilitarian value.'  Even if gold's market value crashes to 0, it still won't be completely useless, as it can still be utilized in industrial/economic/decorative situations.

Now what usefulness would bitcoin present if its market value goes to nil?

But that is not the argument you brought forth. Your original proposition is that money must be backed by something when in fact money valued for its characteristics and properties as store-of-value, currency and unit of account.

Gold's "industrial" value is irrelevant to this discussion.


We shall have to agree to disagree.  If you think people will put their blind faith into a system that presents just as much chaos and corruption/if not more than the current fiat system (and thus a sesspool for hackers and scammers galore)...then I hope it pans out for you.  It is pretty much the furthest thing from a safe haven in my eyes.  Matter of fact it's basically antonymous.


flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:28:58 AM
 #20766

How has the 'trust' factor worked out for bitcoin so far?.........

Very well I must say. In little over 5 years Bitcoin has managed to grow a market cap of over 1B$. Not so bad for a concept that is quite unlike anything this world has seen.

You "transparency" assertion is quite subjective and mostly disingenuous. I will not entertain an argument where one would propose the current financial system is more transparent than the world's biggest open source ledger.

Now please spare us the rest of your depressingly unoriginal idiocy and go back to the troll corner where you came from.  Smiley

Thanks for playing.  I'll just take that as a 'I have no valid counterpoints or factual statements' white flag post. 

inb4 zomg u trollbear zomg fud zomg 2damooooooonnnnnnnnnnn
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:31:37 AM
 #20767

weaker currencies --> perceived stronger currencies (U.S. Dollar) --> bitcoin

I don't see metals as useful a currency as bitcoin but they will, of course, appreciate against a collapsing dollar - just not as much as bitcoin in my opinion. Bitcoin could be the safety valve that preserves some semblance of a global economy and a somewhat civilized society since it will allow the continued trade across distance (metals not so much).

You're complicating what should be a simple issue.  Resources are exchanged to benefit both transacting parties.  You're assuming people find Bitcoin valuable as opposed to food, shelter, visa cards, beanie babies, whatever.  Metals are more useful than Bitcoins in some circumstances.  Not so in others.  Same applies to credit cards, and so on.

Under what realistic circumstances would Bitcoin "preserve some semblance of a global economy"?

Bitcoin will likely be the final (or only) medium of exchange left that will enable people to trade for the food, shelter, etc. It will enable the global trade across distance to continue because it will be the only trusted currency that is not subject to the risk of being "backed" by the "full faith and credit" of bankrupt governments. It will allow the market economy to continue while preventing the total collapse into a barter economy. In short, it will save many from a lot of pain and suffering.



And what exactly is bitcoin 'backed' by? Coins and fiat are backed by physical governments and militia.    People can protest and throw rocks at politicians when shtf. You can't throw rocks online at miners maintaining the blockchains, or rogue exchange owners known only by internet screennames.

Are you assuming the masses will just put all their 'faith' into a non-reversible, non transparent system backed by anonymous neckbeards should the world crumble?

Sounds legit.

You make the same mistake I did before I learned economics. Bitcoin is not backed by anything - just like gold isn't. They are each valued for their individual characteristics and utility. Humans impute value - there is no such thing as "intrinsic" or "inherent" value.



Perhaps bad wording on my part, as 'intrinsic value' has such a broad range of interpretation.  

I'll say 'utilitarian value.'  Even if gold's market value crashes to 0, it still won't be completely useless, as it can still be utilized in industrial/economic/decorative situations.

Now what usefulness would bitcoin present if its market value goes to nil?

But that is not the argument you brought forth. Your original proposition is that money must be backed by something when in fact money valued for its characteristics and properties as store-of-value, currency and unit of account.

Gold's "industrial" value is irrelevant to this discussion.


We shall have to agree to disagree.  If you think people will put their blind faith into a system that presents just as much chaos and corruption/if not more than the current fiat system (and thus a sesspool for hackers and scammers galore)...then I hope it pans out for you.  It is pretty much the furthest thing from a safe haven in my eyes.  Matter of fact it's pretty much antonymous.

You are looking for a safe haven? Try Jesus.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
brg444
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644

Bitcoin replaces central, not commercial, banks


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:31:47 AM
 #20768


We shall have to agree to disagree.  If you think people will put their blind faith into a system that presents just as much chaos and corruption/if not more than the current fiat system (and thus a haven for hackers and scammers galore)...then I hope it pans out for you.  It is pretty much the furthest thing from a safe haven in my eyes.  Matter of fact it's pretty much antonymous.

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

I do hope someone pays you to post here and you do not actually believe the things you write

"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
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:33:46 AM
 #20769


We shall have to agree to disagree.  If you think people will put their blind faith into a system that presents just as much chaos and corruption/if not more than the current fiat system (and thus a haven for hackers and scammers galore)...then I hope it pans out for you.  It is pretty much the furthest thing from a safe haven in my eyes.  Matter of fact it's pretty much antonymous.

 Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

I do hope someone pays you to post here and you do not actually believe the things you write

I'm a trollbear single handedly responsible for creating a bear market and spreading FUD/also the 3rd cousin of Ben Bernanke...why on earth WOULDN'T I be paid to write things?

Now how much are they paying you to wear that foil cap?
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:36:14 AM
 #20770

Well I can't fault you on your pick and choose time frame.

And therein lies the con, it's all about carefully picking your time frame.  It's the oldest salesman tactic in the book.

Dude, I'm not the one who picked that time frame.  Roll Eyes
Wekkel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:38:04 AM
 #20771

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

         ▄███████████████▄
       ▄██▀             ▀██▄
    ▄▄██▀                 ▀██▄▄
█████▀▀       ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄    ▀▀█████
██          ▄▀ ▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▄▀█▄▄      ██
▐█▌       ▄▀ ▄▀ ▄▄▄▀▀▀▄▀▀▀███   ▐█▌
 ██      ▄▀▄▀▄▀▀▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▀█ ▄█▀   ██
 ▐█▌    █▄▀▄▀▄█▀▀▀ ▀█▀ ▄▀▄▀█   ▐█▌
  ██    █▄▀▄▀▄▄█▀ ▄▀ ▄▀▄▀▄▀█   ██
  ▐█▌ ▀▄█████▀▄▄▀▀▄▄▀▄▀▄▀▄▀█  ▐█▌
   ██▌▀████▀██▄▄▀▀▄▄▀▄▀▄▀▄█▀ ▐██
    ██▌▀█▀▀█▄▀▀▄▀▀▄▄▀▄█▄▄█▀ ▐██
     ██▌ ▀  ▀███▄▄▄█████▀  ▐██
      ██▄      ▀▀▀▀▀      ▄██
       ▀██▄             ▄██▀
         ▀██▄         ▄██▀
           ▀██▄     ▄██▀
             ▀███▄███▀
               ▀███▀
.DeepOnion.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★  .❱❱❱ JOIN AIRDROP NOW!.
TOR INTEGRATED & SECURED
★  Your Anonymity Guaranteed
★  Your Assets Secured by TOR
★  Guard Your Privacy!
|Bitcointalk
Reddit
Telegram
|                        ▄▄▀▄▄▀▄▄▀▄▀▀
                    ▄▄██▀█▀▄▀▀▀
                  ▄██▄█▄██▀
                ▄██████▀
              ▄██████▀
  ▄█▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄██████▀
██████▀▀▀▀▀██████▀
 ▀█████  ▄███████
  ████████████▀██
  ██▀███████▀  ██
  ██ ▀████▀    ██
  ██   ▀▀      ██
  ▀█████████████▀
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:45:13 AM
 #20772

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding. 

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount. 

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1274



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:55:28 AM
 #20773

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding.  

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount.  

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.

acknowledging >$5k per BTC (ie alleged next 'bubble' and beyond) is the same as having the dollar collapsing, in both value and utility.
I dont see it happening any time soon tho, but things surely seems to move fast in the financial world.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 07:59:22 AM
 #20774

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding. 

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount. 

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.

Many companies/businesses are holding back some coin.  Probably more than you think. Especially at these prices after such a  large pull  back in price. They are rightly anticipating a turn around.

If Bitcoin lacks the confidence and backing  you claim it does,  why isn't it languishing at a price less than dollar  parity, ie, <$1.00?   All other worthless fiat  currencies are in this range, why not bitcoin?
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 08:57:36 AM
 #20775

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding. 

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount. 

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.

Many companies/businesses are holding back some coin.  Probably more than you think. Especially at these prices after such a  large pull  back in price. They are rightly anticipating a turn around.

If Bitcoin lacks the confidence and backing  you claim it does,  why isn't it languishing at a price less than dollar  parity, ie, <$1.00?   All other worthless fiat  currencies are in this range, why not bitcoin?

Care to cite some sources on which companies are holding back bitcoin and at what percentages?   I'm not talking about individual large scale personal investors, I'm talking about companies.


Sorry, you kind of lost me on the last point.   You can't seriously be comparing the mintage of bitcoin to that of other national currencies, are you? They are nowhere in the same realm, though certainly a day where the btc market falls under the 20 million dollar market cap is not entirely out of the range of possibility.  It was only around 3 years ago when this was the case.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 09:37:24 AM
 #20776

There was once discussion about an exodus plan if a superior technology existed that was not fork-able.  It would maintain a centralized legacy support for cold storage. Bitcoins would be converted proportionally as a one-way transaction. While I commend altcoin developers, some of them have been abusing the community with proof of burn IPOs. Not many people can afford to just dump bitcoins for something that has no value. Yeah free market bla bla, but most of them are scams. Is anyone working on a method to clone one of these altcoins and convert bitcoin outputs to the new system? This would go a long way toward comforting folks that don't have confidence that Bitcoin can live up to its promise. Now I know this sounds like Side Chains. It is because I believe this is the natural consequence of such an experiment. There can be only one.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 09:52:01 AM
 #20777

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding. 

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount. 

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.

Many companies/businesses are holding back some coin.  Probably more than you think. Especially at these prices after such a  large pull  back in price. They are rightly anticipating a turn around.

If Bitcoin lacks the confidence and backing  you claim it does,  why isn't it languishing at a price less than dollar  parity, ie, <$1.00?   All other worthless fiat  currencies are in this range, why not bitcoin?

Overstock 10%.

Also http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2oypbo/bitpay_employee_here_around_50_of_our_merchants/

You made my point.  Bitcoin is different than other fiat currencies which is why it's had such superior price performance in such a short time.
flipstyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 10:06:47 AM
 #20778

I find it easier to think of trust backing a currency. Trust of the receiver that the next person will accept the currency for the same value.

If that trust is gone, so is the currency.

Other elements (government, armies) are just derivatives of this main principle.

For 5 years existence, I think 'trust' in Bitcoin is remarkable. No government, no army but it still goes. Time to re-evaluate old dogmas, I would say.

Wise words.

However, if we're dealing in a situation where the dollar collapses, it is a completely different ballgame and unchartered territory.  Bitcoin having its value directly tied to the dollar right now presents a faster medium for companies to convert over to fiat.  They are not holding.  

Now eliminate fiat from the equation completely.  How much 'faith' would these companies have in actually holding/having to deal with other companies to buy/sell/trade goods using this technology themselves? My guess is nowhere close to the same amount.  

Unless some kind of insurance system is implemented, it's basically the wild wild west for traders and everyday transactions outside of friends and family.

Many companies/businesses are holding back some coin.  Probably more than you think. Especially at these prices after such a  large pull  back in price. They are rightly anticipating a turn around.

If Bitcoin lacks the confidence and backing  you claim it does,  why isn't it languishing at a price less than dollar  parity, ie, <$1.00?   All other worthless fiat  currencies are in this range, why not bitcoin?

Overstock 10%.

Also http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2oypbo/bitpay_employee_here_around_50_of_our_merchants/

You made my point.  Bitcoin is different than other fiat currencies which is why it's had such superior price performance in such a short time.


Mr. Byrne revealed that bitcoin purchases amount to under 0.1 percent of total transactions made on the site, but added that the company is keeping 10 percent of their bitcoin income in its digital form — converting the other 90 percent to fiat via their connection with Coinbase.


All about context.  10 percent of 0.1 percent is a basically negligible amount for them, which is why they're doing it.  If it goes to 0, it's a tax writeoff.  If it takes off to the moon, then their negligible risk pays off fairly handsomely and they can give some high rank employees a christmas bonus.

But I'd be happy to hear of more than one example, and for something that's actually substantial.  I'm not convinced any company out there is really sticking their tails out and hoarding this stuff long term.  Unless they absolutely love playing russian roulette with a loaded gun.


smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
January 29, 2015, 10:09:49 AM
 #20779

There was once discussion about an exodus plan if a superior technology existed that was not fork-able.  It would maintain a centralized legacy support for cold storage. Bitcoins would be converted proportionally as a one-way transaction. While I commend altcoin developers, some of them have been abusing the community with proof of burn IPOs. Not many people can afford to just dump bitcoins for something that has no value. Yeah free market bla bla, but most of them are scams. Is anyone working on a method to clone one of these altcoins and convert bitcoin outputs to the new system? This would go a long way toward comforting folks that don't have confidence that Bitcoin can live up to its promise. Now I know this sounds like Side Chains. It is because I believe this is the natural consequence of such an experiment. There can be only one.

It was discussed somewhat extensively here, including some details about how claims would be represented and processed: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563972.0

The last post on that thread reports someone who had implemented it as a proof of concept.
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
January 29, 2015, 10:10:55 AM
 #20780


All about context.  10 percent of 0.1 percent is a basically negligible amount for them, which is why they're doing it.  If it goes to 0, it's a tax writeoff.  If it takes off to the moon, then their negligible risk pays off fairly handsomely and they can give some high rank employees a christmas bonus.
If all business adopted that approach, Bitcoin would be astronomical.

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
Pages: « 1 ... 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 [1039] 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 ... 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!