The next bitcoin bubble will be massive

[notme]

I have to be honest, I think the bubble is going to burst in the next 6 months.

There are some fundamental issues with bitcoin that will surface in next few months. On the other hand I have no doubt until these issues surface, the price will continue to rise.

Buyer beware!

It is hard to warn about alleged issues with Bitcoin without sounding like you just wanna scare peeps a little so you can buy a bit cheaper...

Especially when you blame "fundamental issues" yet provide no examples.

[jubalix]

Just discovered this thread, good read. I'll add to that chorus of if they increase the 21 million limit, i'll be out.

Was curious where you got the $120 figure from ?

can they do that?    even if they can, i doubt they will. 

Its some lines of code, if everyone agrees it can be changed... It will go against the bitcoin prime directives to do so and the project will be abandoned by the critically thinking people if it occurs. It is still a possibility if enough foolish people get involved and somehow influential. The rest of us will move on to the next thing.

yeah thats why you hedge into LTC/TRC

also if the 51% did decide this they would be massively shooting their own value in the foot so to speak so it is unlikely they will change...what value would it have to them to do this??? none, just dilute their asset price

[BTC Books]

I have to be honest, I think the bubble is going to burst in the next 6 months.

There are some fundamental issues with bitcoin that will surface in next few months. On the other hand I have no doubt until these issues surface, the price will continue to rise.

Buyer beware!

Yeah.  You keep saying that, in many threads.

And yet you never say what those "fundamental issues" are, do you?

I won't bother asking, since I see your ignorance and know you can't and won't respond to that.  But I will ask this:

Why?  Why troll?  Does it make you feel powerful?  Influential?

You aren't either of those things.  But I'd be interested in your own take on it.

[Ares]

I have to be honest, I think the bubble is going to burst in the next 6 months.

There are some fundamental issues with bitcoin that will surface in next few months. On the other hand I have no doubt until these issues surface, the price will continue to rise.

Buyer beware!

Yeah.  You keep saying that, in many threads.

And yet you never say what those "fundamental issues" are, do you?

I won't bother asking, since I see your ignorance and know you can't and won't respond to that.  But I will ask this:

Why?  Why troll?  Does it make you feel powerful?  Influential?

You aren't either of those things.  But I'd be interested in your own take on it.

I don't think it's trolling, but rather someone trying to spread FUD in order to buy in lower, as mentioned a few posts earlier

[hgmichna]

Why do you think bitcoin cannot "incorporate the bitcoin experience" and be improved itself? That seems like the path of least resistance. I think many people miss the social aspect of bitcoin. Anything can be changed, even the 21 mil limit. Personally if that looks like that will happen I'm out though.

Because to change bitcoin you would need a solid majority in favor of a particular change. Then  you'd have to fork, which can be a painful process involving double-spending and all kinds of technical errors and fraud.

But I agree that this is also possible. I wouldn't mind going that way if it turned out to be workable.

[calian]

I predict a buying opportunity around $13 some time between October '12 and the end of February '13. Then back to never-
ending bull run.

Just noticed this post from back in August. Nothing lasts forever of course but not too shabby thus far. http://www.bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg360ztgSzm1g10zm2g25zv

[hgmichna]

I predict a buying opportunity around $13 some time between October '12 and the end of February '13. Then back to never-
ending bull run.

Just noticed this post from back in August. Nothing lasts forever of course but not too shabby thus far. […]

Excellent prediction, right on target, except for "never-ending". There are no never-ending bull runs. But I take that as a benevolent exaggeration, and so you should be admired, calian.

Of course there is always the suspicion that, with hindsight, we can now pick out just those predictions that turned out to be correct by sheer luck.

[calian]

Excellent prediction, right on target, except for "never-ending". There are no never-ending bull runs. But I take that as a benevolent exaggeration, and so you should be admired, calian.

Of course there is always the suspicion that, with hindsight, we can now pick out just those predictions that turned out to be correct by sheer luck.

It may not be never-ending but I'm loath to try to predict where it will end. Anyway this whole thing is just a preview. Bubble/bull-run #3 will be the really fun one. I'm pretty sure the crash from this one will not be as deep and prolonged as the last one either.

[dacoinminster]

Since we are reviving old prediction threads, I revived my own:

I'd like to go on the record again saying that Bitcoin price increases are just getting started.

[Gordonium]

There is no bubble, only coming singularity. Buy now as much as you an as fast as you can. Train is about to leave the station forever.

[mp420]

I think the most fundamental issue with Bitcoin is the lack of scalability, and very long lead times of any planned scalability enhancements. If Bitcoin's actual use (number of transactions) grows along with the price increase, we'll hit the 1M block size limit at around $300 to $1000. Of course bitcoin won't lose its usefulness at that point, it will just mean that only transactions with very high fees will have a chance to get included in "the next block".

I think the claims that Bitcoin would provide cheaper transactions than the alternatives were misguided to begin with.

[hgmichna]

I think the most fundamental issue with Bitcoin is the lack of scalability, and very long lead times of any planned scalability enhancements. If Bitcoin's actual use (number of transactions) grows along with the price increase, we'll hit the 1M block size limit at around $300 to $1000. Of course bitcoin won't lose its usefulness at that point, it will just mean that only transactions with very high fees will have a chance to get included in "the next block".

I think the claims that Bitcoin would provide cheaper transactions than the alternatives were misguided to begin with.

I think the same. Perhaps some trust-based micro-payment system on top of bitcoin could solve this problem. Bitcoin could then be used for regular (for example, daily) rebalancing payments. Bitcoin would, of course, still be used directly for large payments.

[humanitee]

I think the most fundamental issue with Bitcoin is the lack of scalability, and very long lead times of any planned scalability enhancements. If Bitcoin's actual use (number of transactions) grows along with the price increase, we'll hit the 1M block size limit at around $300 to $1000. Of course bitcoin won't lose its usefulness at that point, it will just mean that only transactions with very high fees will have a chance to get included in "the next block".

I think the claims that Bitcoin would provide cheaper transactions than the alternatives were misguided to begin with.

I think the same. Perhaps some trust-based micro-payment system on top of bitcoin could solve this problem. Bitcoin could then be used for regular (for example, daily) rebalancing payments. Bitcoin would, of course, still be used directly for large payments.

Today the Bitcoin network is restricted to a sustained rate of 7 tps by some artificial limits. These were put in place to stop people from ballooning the size of the block chain before the network and community was ready for it. Once those limits are lifted, the maximum transaction rate will go up significantly.

The core Bitcoin network can scale to much higher transaction rates than are seen today, assuming that nodes in the network are primarily running on high end servers rather than desktops. Bitcoin was designed to support lightweight clients that only process small parts of the block chain (see simplified payment verification below for more details on this). A configuration in which the vast majority of users sync lightweight clients to more powerful backbone nodes is capable of scaling to millions of users and tens of thousands of transactions per second.

Let's assume an average rate of 2000tps, so just VISA. Transactions vary in size from about 0.2 kilobytes to over 1 kilobyte, but it's averaging half a kilobyte today.
That means that you need to keep up with around 8 megabits/second of transaction data (2000tps * 512 bytes) / 1024 bytes in a kilobyte / 1024 kilobytes in a megabyte = 0.97 megabytes per second * 8 = 7.8 megabits/second.
This sort of bandwidth is already common for even residential connections today, and is certainly at the low end of what colocation providers would expect to provide you with.

[mp420]

I know what the Scalability wiki page claims. But:

1) There's nowhere unanimous support for altering the 1M block size limit. It's an either-or choice between "everyone must be able to run a full node" and "everyone must be able to make bitcoin transactions". Of course this is idiotic, there is no use running a node if you can't make transactions. But we really can't convince some people until the MINIMUM fee is worth several dollars.
2) Even if there was an unanimous support, the lead time for the change is long.

[byronbb]

I think the most fundamental issue with Bitcoin is the lack of scalability, and very long lead times of any planned scalability enhancements. If Bitcoin's actual use (number of transactions) grows along with the price increase, we'll hit the 1M block size limit at around $300 to $1000. Of course bitcoin won't lose its usefulness at that point, it will just mean that only transactions with very high fees will have a chance to get included in "the next block".

I think the claims that Bitcoin would provide cheaper transactions than the alternatives were misguided to begin with.

The good thing about billion dollar p2p open source currencies is that smart people will be attracted to solve problems. As capital is invested into coins themselves, coin holders will be FANATICAL about ensuring the network is secure and efficient.

[Wekkel]

Devs will find a way. Focus will shift from the meteoric rise to BTC's application anyway at a certain moment. Remember, it is still beta.

I will start to spend BTC when the Chinese electronics sellers start to accept them.

[wopwop]

Most people don't care about wallets, they wont even install the client

A MtGox account is enough

[420]

Was $260->$60 massive?

[bitcon]

she likes her paper dollars: http://youtu.be/cBJWLAKpfY4

[bitcool]

I think the most fundamental issue with Bitcoin is the lack of scalability, and very long lead times of any planned scalability enhancements. If Bitcoin's actual use (number of transactions) grows along with the price increase, we'll hit the 1M block size limit at around $300 to $1000. Of course bitcoin won't lose its usefulness at that point, it will just mean that only transactions with very high fees will have a chance to get included in "the next block".

I think the claims that Bitcoin would provide cheaper transactions than the alternatives were misguided to begin with.

If Bitcoin becomes THE preferred world currency for cross-border transactions, not supporting micro payments is not a terrible trade-off. One-coin-catch-all system makes little sense.

After all, for smaller transactions, there are always other options: LTC, PPC, Ripple, etc.