Bitcoin Forum
May 03, 2024, 06:26:18 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Do you think Buffett was right?  (Read 11608 times)
Syke
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:03:05 PM
 #21

"It's a method of transmitting money."

Wrong. Bitcoin is money. Bitcoin transactions are ways of transmitting money. Just like checks, bitcoin transactions have little value in themselves. The value is what they transmit.

Buy & Hold
1714760778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714760778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714760778
Reply with quote  #2

1714760778
Report to moderator
1714760778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714760778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714760778
Reply with quote  #2

1714760778
Report to moderator
1714760778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714760778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714760778
Reply with quote  #2

1714760778
Report to moderator
The network tries to produce one block per 10 minutes. It does this by automatically adjusting how difficult it is to produce blocks.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714760778
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714760778

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714760778
Reply with quote  #2

1714760778
Report to moderator
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:05:16 PM
 #22

bitcoin needs two things to really be a money transmitter:

 - liquid market

 - enough security for my current transfer (miners need an incentive to secure the network - and they are paid in btc)

 - a price high enough that i am able to buy the amount of btc i want to transfer

If there is a technology that allows the transfer of fiat currencies through a distributed ledger network (that doesn't need a cryptocurrency to secure it) the need to use bitcoin as a "check" to transfer value vanishes, same for your 3 requirements.

Is that even possible? How can you secure a more or less decentralized network without a "reward" system?
Wandererfromthenorth
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:05:53 PM
 #23

bitcoin needs two things to really be a money transmitter:

 - liquid market

 - enough security for my current transfer (miners need an incentive to secure the network - and they are paid in btc)

 - a price high enough that i am able to buy the amount of btc i want to transfer

If there is a technology that allows the transfer of fiat currencies through a distributed ledger network (that doesn't need a cryptocurrency to secure it) the need to use bitcoin as a "check" to transmit value vanishes, same for your 3 requirements.

at first: as we talk specifically about bitcoin my points stand.

if you talk about something like XUSD (NXT) or BitUSD (bitshares) i dont think you are right. try "buying" 100Million bitusd, transmit them and sell them back.
If you use the ripple network for example you don't need to buy any cryptocurrency ever in order to transfer any amount of dollars in the network.
You can transfer USD (or anything else) and you don't need liquidity in a crypto market (it's not a necessity anyway)

I expect more technologies like that to come out the next few years.
Dilla
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:08:29 PM
 #24

He either had no idea what Bitcoin was when he said this, or just is talking down a potential draw away from USD, which he has a lot of his wealth based on.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
 #25

"It's a method of transmitting money."

Wrong. Bitcoin is money.

Is it really? I don't see why most people should use it for day-to-day transactions.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:11:37 PM
 #26

bitcoin needs two things to really be a money transmitter:

 - liquid market

 - enough security for my current transfer (miners need an incentive to secure the network - and they are paid in btc)

 - a price high enough that i am able to buy the amount of btc i want to transfer

If there is a technology that allows the transfer of fiat currencies through a distributed ledger network (that doesn't need a cryptocurrency to secure it) the need to use bitcoin as a "check" to transmit value vanishes, same for your 3 requirements.

at first: as we talk specifically about bitcoin my points stand.

if you talk about something like XUSD (NXT) or BitUSD (bitshares) i dont think you are right. try "buying" 100Million bitusd, transmit them and sell them back.
If you use the ripple network for example you don't need to buy any cryptocurrency ever in order to transfer any amount of dollars in the network.
You can transfer USD (or anything else) and you don't need liquidity in a crypto market (it's not a necessity anyway)

I expect more technologies like that to come out the next few years.

Is that cheaper to use Ripple over other alternatives?
onemorexmr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:18:02 PM
 #27

I expect more technologies like that to come out the next few years.

ripple requires trust as i need a gateway to get my usd into the system. for me its the same as walking to my bank, deposit to my bank account and use ebanking to transmit it.

why should i use ripple? my bank even handles currency conversions for me.

you may even compare it with paypal if you reduce ripple to the money transmitting aspect - you dont have the usd. you have just an IOU.

XMR || Monero || monerodice.net || xmr.to || mymonero.com || openalias.org || you think bitcoin is fungible? watch this
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:20:30 PM
 #28

 His track record speaks for itself. It also tells us that the combination of tech and certain PM esque qualities are both fundamental turn offs for him and always have been.  

He's an investor. At the moment this whole space is speculation. They are totally different beasts.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:26:14 PM
 #29

His track record speaks for itself. It also tells us that the combination of tech and certain PM esque qualities are both fundamental turn offs for him and always have been.  

He's an investor. At the moment this whole space is speculation. They are totally different beasts.

But isn't he a part of a demographic that supposedly will want to invest in bitcoin when (or if) the bitcoin ETF launches?
JimboToronto
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4004
Merit: 4468


You're never too old to think young.


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:31:53 PM
 #30

Always trust a shirt maker about advice on cryptographic internet protocols.

 Roll Eyes
gentlemand
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2590
Merit: 3013


Welt Am Draht


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:34:03 PM
 #31

His track record speaks for itself. It also tells us that the combination of tech and certain PM esque qualities are both fundamental turn offs for him and always have been.  

He's an investor. At the moment this whole space is speculation. They are totally different beasts.

But isn't he a part of a demographic that supposedly will want to invest in bitcoin when (or if) the bitcoin ETF launches?

I can't see grandpa going for it under any circumstances myself. If anyone does expose themselves a little to it, it'll more likely be folks in their 30s and 40s who've grown up around the idea of an internet economy.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:39:23 PM
 #32

His track record speaks for itself. It also tells us that the combination of tech and certain PM esque qualities are both fundamental turn offs for him and always have been.  

He's an investor. At the moment this whole space is speculation. They are totally different beasts.

But isn't he a part of a demographic that supposedly will want to invest in bitcoin when (or if) the bitcoin ETF launches?

I can't see grandpa going for it under any circumstances myself. If anyone does expose themselves a little to it, it'll more likely be folks in their 30s and 40s who've grown up around the idea of an internet economy.

I think that if they wanted to buy bitcoin, they could do it easily today.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 05:40:16 PM
 #33

Always trust a shirt maker about advice on cryptographic internet protocols.

 Roll Eyes

You don't think he has advisers?
ElectricMucus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666
Merit: 1057


Marketing manager - GO MP


View Profile WWW
March 02, 2015, 05:54:13 PM
 #34

Always trust a shirt maker about advice on cryptographic internet protocols.

 Roll Eyes

>cryptographic
no, just because it utilized cryptography does not make it cryptographic.
>internet
yes, Internet Funbuxcurrency.
>protocols
no, Bitcoin is not a protocol, it's a proof of concept prototype implementation, which has been pushed into production by delusions of grandeur. No matter how you like it.
Ektra
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137
Merit: 106


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 06:08:36 PM
 #35


The point is simple, the bitcoin network could become an efficient way for transmitting value world wide. Should not be used for storing value.


I think bitcoin or alts are an excellent technology for storing value, volatility aside, there is no other form of money so versatile and stealthily transportable as a wallet file. Not to mention, if people use bitcoin only as a WU replacement and never save any, they have to use the tedious, time consuming and costly on and off ramp exchanges for every transaction. You can do it if you want, but bitcoin's natural tendency is to be self contained and currency-like.

Think about it, if bitcoin did indeed become that efficient way for transmitting value world wide with lots of adoption, and nobody hoarded it, then the transaction volume should be quite steady on average, supporting a steady exchange rate and thereby encouraging businesses and people to not bother with converting to fiat because it would be more expensive and less convenient. And there you end up with a very solid currency.
dataispower (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 289



View Profile
March 02, 2015, 06:21:28 PM
 #36


The point is simple, the bitcoin network could become an efficient way for transmitting value world wide. Should not be used for storing value.


I think bitcoin or alts are an excellent technology for storing value, volatility aside, there is no other form of money so versatile and stealthily transportable as a wallet file. Not to mention, if people use bitcoin only as a WU replacement and never save any, they have to use the tedious, time consuming and costly on and off ramp exchanges for every transaction. You can do it if you want, but bitcoin's natural tendency is to be self contained and currency-like.

Think about it, if bitcoin did indeed become that efficient way for transmitting value world wide with lots of adoption, and nobody hoarded it, then the transaction volume should be quite steady on average, supporting a steady exchange rate and thereby encouraging businesses and people to not bother with converting to fiat because it would be more expensive and less convenient. And there you end up with a very solid currency.

But the problem is that people treat bitcoin as an investment, and this is why volatility is part of the game.
neurotypical
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672
Merit: 502


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 06:37:48 PM
 #37

"It's a method of transmitting money."

Wrong. Bitcoin is money. Bitcoin transactions are ways of transmitting money. Just like checks, bitcoin transactions have little value in themselves. The value is what they transmit.
OLD people like Buffet will never get their 20 century brains around Bitcoin. It's HOPELESS. I hope they live enough years to get proved wrong big time.
johnyj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988
Merit: 1012


Beyond Imagination


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 07:10:32 PM
 #38

Buffett don't even understand where is fiat money's value comes from, not even mention bitcoin

btcxyzzz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 888
Merit: 1000

Monero - secure, private and untraceable currency.


View Profile WWW
March 02, 2015, 07:39:53 PM
 #39

No, I think that we all know better than one of the world's most successful and experienced investors.

If he was that calibre, he would invested in Bitcoin and become even richer. To me, he is just an old fart.

Token Bubbles – Transforming the ICO Rating and Analysis Space.
dsly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 02, 2015, 08:01:36 PM
 #40

He was obviously wrong. Look the price is going up today .People believe in bitcoins and thats the only reason for it

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!