Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.

[wachtwoord]

Gold collapsing. Bitcoin collapsing. 

Gold/silver back under $1400/$22. Bitcoin down to $110ish. Darn, all the good hedges are screwed, I guess I'll just invest in fiat 

Do you mean Fiat? Morningstar seems to think it's a good investment http://quotes.morningstar.com/stock/fiaty/s?pgid=hetopquote&t=FIATY

[tvbcof]

While it would still be a success and a net-benefit to humanity if bitcoin did become a relatively low-volume reserve currency only, it *can* be so much more than that... I think our sights should remain set on high-transaction volume with low-fees. If that proves absolutely technically unfeasible at some point, so be it, but it's such great potential that I think we have to strive for it.

Trying to scale is what pilots refer to as a box canyon.  Once you turn up it, you will not be able to turn around.

But it would be trivially easy for Bitcoin to scale massively and allow low fees.  You just monetize the information coming off the network.  PayPal sized outfits could handle the capacity, and Google-sized ones could handle it easily and make the best use of the info.  With some strain and focus, Dwolla-sized entities could run a pretty good size Bitcoin node, and they could just sell the info to Google so subsidize their operations, so that is another business model which could work.

By-n-large the WWW and e-mail already run on this model.  Bitcoin can also.  It isn't the end of the world or anything, and it would be dandy for getting 'Bitcoin Up'...to get this conversation back on topic.  Might be the best thing for distributed crypto-currencies.  It think that Bitcoin has the potential to be the trusted reserve currency, but a purpose oriented design would have many advantages might ultimately that might be a better focus of energy anyway.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Direct Bitcoin transactions would always be available for big ticket items, a HD TV or a House or Business to Business purchases, even small web purchases.

But a layered service could practically exist on top of Bitcoin like a Credit/Debit Card for your smaller purchases, (Groceries, coffee entertainment, meals etc) and would happen much like your credit card, a trusted service provider could hold your coins securely for you and you could spend on the there payment network. (Daily settlement happen in Bitcoine B2B at the end of the day)

If those services are needed and wanted then they will develop on their own without needing any extra encouragement. Bitcoin should not be intentionally limited in order to promote or make room for those kinds of systems.

But there are risks involved with taking bitcoin outside its design scope that need to be acknowledged. If bitcoin cannot be all things for all people those facts need to be revealed and accepted. Touting an all bells and whistles solution without appreciating the limitations of the existing technology is dangerous. No one can see the future.

[cypherdoc]

I find the whole "cash" thing (even "coins") idiosyncratic. Bitcoin isn't cash; it does away with the need for cash, coin, or anything actually - or even virtually - changing hands. Those are old tech, artifacts of an age when society was both too big and too low-tech to keep track of transactions in a universal ledger. Tiny communities could use a ledger system like rai stones, but for millennia the technology needed to enable a universal ledger for the global economic community was unavailable, so people never moved beyond hard objects and centralized trust systems ultimately based on them. Bitcoin is that universal ledger, enabled by recent technological innovations, obviating the need for any media of exchange at all. Calling these tickmarks in the ledger "coins" is just to make it sound familiar to people; ultimately it is a harmful distortion.

Failure to fully grasp this may result in: wondering what bitcoins are "backed by," fretting about altcoins (the world only needs one universal ledger, no "gold and silver" ledgers), losing arguments with Bitcoin skeptics, misjudging the significance (or insignificance) of BM+OT (or Ripple), and generally being a lily-livered weak hand.

respected Fed economist Narayana Kocherlakota apparently agrees with you:

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr218.pdf

[Adrian-x]

I find the whole "cash" thing (even "coins") idiosyncratic. Bitcoin isn't cash; it does away with the need for cash, coin, or anything actually - or even virtually - changing hands. Those are old tech, artifacts of an age when society was both too big and too low-tech to keep track of transactions in a universal ledger. Tiny communities could use a ledger system like rai stones, but for millennia the technology needed to enable a universal ledger for the global economic community was unavailable, so people never moved beyond hard objects and centralized trust systems ultimately based on them. Bitcoin is that universal ledger, enabled by recent technological innovations, obviating the need for any media of exchange at all. Calling these tickmarks in the ledger "coins" is just to make it sound familiar to people; ultimately it is a harmful distortion.

Failure to fully grasp this may result in: wondering what bitcoins are "backed by," fretting about altcoins (the world only needs one universal ledger, no "gold and silver" ledgers), losing arguments with Bitcoin skeptics, misjudging the significance (or insignificance) of BM+OT (or Ripple), and generally being a lily-livered weak hand.

respected Fed economist Narayana Kocherlakota apparently agrees with you:

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr218.pdf

Cool, I also read Bitcoin is memory a novel way to change one's persecution. *edit * oh I see it's the same idea it just took me a while to see it's origin.

On that note gold as trade (IOU) memory dying Bitcoin birthing.

[cypherdoc]

I find the whole "cash" thing (even "coins") idiosyncratic. Bitcoin isn't cash; it does away with the need for cash, coin, or anything actually - or even virtually - changing hands. Those are old tech, artifacts of an age when society was both too big and too low-tech to keep track of transactions in a universal ledger. Tiny communities could use a ledger system like rai stones, but for millennia the technology needed to enable a universal ledger for the global economic community was unavailable, so people never moved beyond hard objects and centralized trust systems ultimately based on them. Bitcoin is that universal ledger, enabled by recent technological innovations, obviating the need for any media of exchange at all. Calling these tickmarks in the ledger "coins" is just to make it sound familiar to people; ultimately it is a harmful distortion.

Failure to fully grasp this may result in: wondering what bitcoins are "backed by," fretting about altcoins (the world only needs one universal ledger, no "gold and silver" ledgers), losing arguments with Bitcoin skeptics, misjudging the significance (or insignificance) of BM+OT (or Ripple), and generally being a lily-livered weak hand.

respected Fed economist Narayana Kocherlakota apparently agrees with you:

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr218.pdf

Cool, I also read Bitcoin is memory a novel way to change one's persecution.

On that note gold as trade (IOU) memory dying Bitcoin birthing.

Gold dying, Bitcoin birthing.

i like that.

[phoenix1]

Thankyou for both of those articles .... they were very enlightening

[pirateat4O]

Who's ready for some action?

[molecular]

Thankyou for both of those articles .... they were very enlightening

dito... this is cool stuff.

[tvbcof]

Who's ready for some action?

Bring it!  Bitcoin is getting boring and disappointing and we need someone to breath some life into things.  Up?  Down?  Who cares.

[tvbcof]

Who's ready for some action?

Bring it!  Bitcoin is getting boring and disappointing and we need someone to breath some life into things.  Up?  Down?  Who cares.

here comes 100

It's a start.  If we do another 2011 pattern it could get down to $20-ish in a quarter or two.  Then (hopefully) upwards and into the next spike.  Thankfully I took advantage of the last spike to zero my USD investment so I can be more comfortable to sit on my hoard for a few years to see how things go.

Now I can choose between Gold, Silver or BTC (or property for that matter) to sell if come up short of spending money.

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

We may well spend some time below $100, but there's no reason to expect a replay of 2011, when we rose faster, higher, and for way less reason and then people assumed Bitcoin was a goner when the bubble popped (even though it bottomed at a valuation that was still awesome for people who got in early). This time we rose slower, rose for all sorts of big reasons that remain in play, and people know a bubble pop isn't going to be the death of Bitcoin. So we aren't going nearly as low as in 2011 ($30 would be about equivalent, $50 is almost guaranteed to hold this time, if not $80). There remains a certain sense of a lack of speculative capitulation in the markets, and so we may swoop down to shake out one last batch of weak hands, so that every Feb-March 2013 short-term speculator goes sour on holding bitcoins. Then we'll be ready to go higher. Of course news is the X factor.

[Adrian-x]

Gold dying, Bitcoin birthing.

i like that.

Below $100 someone call the midwife!

[miscreanity]

I also doubt we'll spend longer than a few months below triple-digits.

ASIC miners will recoup initial investment, and saturation of the mining market with the hardware will decrease profit margins. This will raise the price floor over time.

The legal attacks on exchanges is likely causing hesitance of inflows. As the issue is resolved through various methods, flows will resume and exceed current highs. Numerous other advancements, such as non-smartphone functionality, are spreading and will continue opening markets.

Growing awareness and acceptance of Bitcoin for payment, even as a token gesture, is providing a highly porous gateway system for usage. Right now, few businesses have sufficient data to make decisive decisions, but as volume increases, those accepting coin will be well positioned. Existing outfits doing well with Bitcoin should largely see stay progress.

Persistent financial instability and high net worth entrants are contributing to the relative stability. The former thanks to official efforts at masking vulnerabilities, the later with increasingly savvy accumulation and trading practices. Traditional system instabilities will rise again soon, with the accumulation occurring at each plateau ratcheting up the Bitcoin network's value.

As gold becomes increasingly scarce at scale, other assets will be acquired by the wealthy. France just prohibited shipping of precious metals and cash; diamonds are finding use as transport medium because they can pass metal detectors. It's only a matter of time before these and other physically liquid forms of wealth dry up or incur restrictive measures that prevent reliable movement.

All of the above point to higher eventual valuation for easily transportable, liquid assets - especially Bitcoin. I am still divided as to whether gold and other monetarily liquid analogs will experience a sudden revaluation first, or Bitcoin will see a slingshot effect of sorts as all other forms of wealth storage become saturated and suppressed while it expands to solidify as a global reserve pool.

I consider regulatory concerns at this point to be transitory and mostly ineffective. Of greater import is network processing strength and distribution of controlling interests. Also note that it may be hard to get back into the Bitcoin system once you've exited to fiat, particularly in regard to protection of ownership identity; weigh the value of trading for profit versus the potential of being hunted by bankrupt but still powerful institutions.

[vokain]

As gold becomes increasingly scarce at scale, other assets will be acquired by the wealthy. France just prohibited shipping of precious metals and cash; diamonds are finding use as transport medium because they can pass metal detectors. It's only a matter of time before these and other physically liquid forms of wealth dry up or incur restrictive measures that prevent reliable movement.

Diamonds as an investment/store of value? That's an obtuse thought..how things are changing.

[wachtwoord]

Diamonds as an investment/store of value? That's an obtuse thought..how things are changing.

carbon atoms are one of the most frequently occurring atoms on earth. Diamonds may be a girls best fried, they are not an investment.

[dorigan22]

Bitcoin and gold collapsing!  At least right now, could change tomorrow!

[Adrian-x]

We may well spend some time below $100, but there's no reason to expect a replay of 2011, when we rose faster, higher, and for way less reason and then people assumed Bitcoin was a goner when the bubble popped (even though it bottomed at a valuation that was still awesome for people who got in early). This time we rose slower, rose for all sorts of big reasons that remain in play, and people know a bubble pop isn't going to be the death of Bitcoin. So we aren't going nearly as low as in 2011 ($30 would be about equivalent, $50 is almost guaranteed to hold this time, if not $80). There remains a certain sense of a lack of speculative capitulation in the markets, and so we may swoop down to shake out one last batch of weak hands, so that every Feb-March 2013 short-term speculator goes sour on holding bitcoins. Then we'll be ready to go higher. Of course news is the X factor.

It looks like a repeat of the slide down to $2, BTC  trading will stagnate until we see a new balance between mining, development and the market.

The mmining aspect of Bitcoin has been turned on it's head, new players new dynamic, new investment decisions, new technology.

Anyone involved in Bitcoin in 2012 (coins acquired below $10) won't be investing in new coin unless mining, and those who have invested during the bubble, will be disillusioned and a few will realize how this idea is as big as the printing press, and invest in new coins on the slide down to the bottom.

Those taking profit will in some way invest in network improvements or BTC business to maintain BTC value or earn new coins.

All in all inflation in the Bitcoin economt (deflation in BTC to USD) = development and investment, when we come out of this development cycle we will see a a serge an interest.

In my opinion we are in a bear market for training Bitcoin and deep pockets have the manipulation advantage.

[Adrian-x]

Diamonds as an investment/store of value? That's an obtuse thought..how things are changing.

carbon atoms are one of the most frequently occurring atoms on earth. Diamonds may be a girls best fried, they are not an investment.

+1
"a girl's best friend", and "diamonds are forever" are just marketing slogans.
FYI
My Dad solid his business 15 years ago and invested in some diamonds, he just sold them, not only did they not hold there value in relation to inflation but lost value in relation to the USD as well. (Admittedly he went through a dealer both ways and could get more if sold direct.)

[cypherdoc]

There remains a certain sense of a lack of speculative capitulation in the markets

we are still in the "ignore" phase.