BitCoin
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
but the supply of BC is limited
That's just one cryptocurrency - there are over 1100 of the buggers. BitCoin is riding high right now but others are also well rated - LiteCoin, Ethereum amongst others.
I don't own any BitCoin, but I can see its value; the others may not adhere to the same principles and may not yield similar results. Also, there is the lesson learned from the Spanish conquest; if you drown the market with alternatives, all options will suffer. Looks like a strategy to me. With "suffering" meaning it is now trading at more than 4750 euro's; and cryptocurrencies are by no means something that can be considered "mainstream" - there's not a lot of shops accepting those things.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
I've been studying currencies for years now due to an interest in Forex. I am not a bazillionaire. This is a hobby of mine, so take my words with a grain of salt... 1) Rather than talk about the CEO of Bitcoin (he's obviously biased) I'll mention analysts... First, psychology teaches us its fun to jump on the bandwagon AFTER we see positive movement. And while that's all fine and dandy because people following along gives us swings in the markets to play with. But it A: limits profits and B: by its very nature means most people don't have to have a clue as to *why* it happened. And that's actually ok if you don't care about long term trends, but I digress. However, most will pretend they know to why things happened to sound smart. Remember, in the markets everyone claims to be rich and yet over 90% of people lose money (they just lie about it). So, forget what most people say. Watch what they DO. Because if they really know what they're talking about, they'd be in a yacht drinking mai tais. The point... most analysts get paid to sound smart and get readers. They don't make millions from the market themselves. So really, what do most know, if they themselves aren't profitable with the market they claim to know? They're not scientists. They're not economists. They're not even bankers. So really... what do they know? 2) Now, on to the future. Paper currency will die in developed countries. Over the past 100 years humanity has had a digital revolution. That's going nowhere. As population keeps on increasing but land and resources don't, we'll have to find a way to stop using paper for this. And we have it... digital crypto-currencies. However, it will take two generations at least to catch on big time. As in at least another 100 years. Old people that don't want to change will have to die to be blunt. Paper money will be around for a while, but it'll be phased out eventually just like gold was. In fact, there's not enough paper money right now to cover all the "money" in the US. Most of it is already just a number in a computer. Bitcoin is the guinea pig. It's being watched heavily as a tool for the future. It could die a sudden death though and that won't stop crypto-currencies or digital currencies in general. We need something new. The US dollar is doomed for failure. Right now it's impossible to fix it. As soon as people try to cut costs to pay off debt, people want to wage war. It's gotten out of hand and we're headed for hyperinflation as a way to "lower our deficit" if we don't
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
but it'll be phased out eventually just like gold was.
Since when is gold phased out? Did the US sell their stock? A lot of economists idiots called it an relic, without knowing the basics of economics. Value is determined by how many uses a human has for it, with some things being required (food) and some not required, but usefull (coal). A kilo smartphones has more gold than a kilo of ore; it has always been valuable because humans have multiple uses for the easily-shaped non-corrosive metal. It can easily be divided, retains its value, does not rot, and even acts as a currency in wartime. Did the Germans repatriate their gold out of tradition for a phased-out currency? Or are they stocking up a common resource that has a lot of demand?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
I don't own any BitCoin, but I can see its value; the others may not adhere to the same principles and may not yield similar results. Also, there is the lesson learned from the Spanish conquest; if you drown the market with alternatives, all options will suffer. Looks like a strategy to me. With "suffering" meaning it is now trading at more than 4750 euro's; and cryptocurrencies are by no means something that can be considered "mainstream" - there's not a lot of shops accepting those things.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
As we speak Bitcoin, Ethereum and LiteCoin are all down, Bitcoin -3.59%. It's nowt more than a gamble in a highly volatile market.
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
but it'll be phased out eventually just like gold was.
Since when is gold phased out? Did the US sell their stock? A lot of economists idiots called it an relic, without knowing the basics of economics. Value is determined by how many uses a human has for it, with some things being required (food) and some not required, but usefull (coal). A kilo smartphones has more gold than a kilo of ore; it has always been valuable because humans have multiple uses for the easily-shaped non-corrosive metal. It can easily be divided, retains its value, does not rot, and even acts as a currency in wartime. Did the Germans repatriate their gold out of tradition for a phased-out currency? Or are they stocking up a common resource that has a lot of demand?
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Since when is gold phased out? Did the US sell their stock?
The gold standard was phased out. It's gone. Kaput. Of course gold exists. But the gold standard doesn't. This is pretty common knowledge with economists so I really didn't elaborate on it. Gold Standard History and Facts[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
A lot of economists idiots called it an relic, without knowing the basics of economics. Value is determined by how many uses a human has for it, with some things being required (food) and some not required, but usefull (coal). A kilo smartphones has more gold than a kilo of ore; it has always been valuable because humans have multiple uses for the easily-shaped non-corrosive metal. It can easily be divided, retains its value, does not rot, and even acts as a currency in wartime.
Yeah sure. But the gold standard is still phased out Eddy. And we're comparing apples and oranges here.
Jeremy Falcon
-
I was thinking of mining but I did the sums and it doesn't pay unless you are doing it as a hobby or you have enough to make a large investment in kit and you can fix your power and other costs.
From what I know (I never mined at all)... yeah mining doesn't really pay off these days. But I know zilch about mining, so you never know...
Jeremy Falcon
-
As we speak Bitcoin, Ethereum and LiteCoin are all down, Bitcoin -3.59%. It's nowt more than a gamble in a highly volatile market.
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Bitcoin -3.59%. It's nowt more than a gamble in a highly volatile market.
..and how is the result based on its ten year performance? Anything that is traded in a volatile market moves up and down fast, but only BC keeps climbing as gold was expected to :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Since when is gold phased out? Did the US sell their stock?
The gold standard was phased out. It's gone. Kaput. Of course gold exists. But the gold standard doesn't. This is pretty common knowledge with economists so I really didn't elaborate on it. Gold Standard History and Facts[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
A lot of economists idiots called it an relic, without knowing the basics of economics. Value is determined by how many uses a human has for it, with some things being required (food) and some not required, but usefull (coal). A kilo smartphones has more gold than a kilo of ore; it has always been valuable because humans have multiple uses for the easily-shaped non-corrosive metal. It can easily be divided, retains its value, does not rot, and even acts as a currency in wartime.
Yeah sure. But the gold standard is still phased out Eddy. And we're comparing apples and oranges here.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
This is pretty common knowledge with economists so I really didn't elaborate on it.
Listen to Alan Greenspan[^] on gold. Common knowledge with economists might not be reality :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
But the gold standard is still phased out Eddy. And we're comparing apples and oranges here.
I beg to differ; only gold is money. Everything else is credit.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Bitcoin -3.59%. It's nowt more than a gamble in a highly volatile market.
..and how is the result based on its ten year performance? Anything that is traded in a volatile market moves up and down fast, but only BC keeps climbing as gold was expected to :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Keep in mind I don't follow bitcoin... but I do follow real currencies. So just to pitch in... extreme volatility can be the result of a couple things... one of which is low volume. Bitcoin is the most popular one out there, so by virtue of that, even though it's volatile I would suspect it would be less volatile than the crypto-currencies that nobody knows about. Volatility is a double-edged sword. If you know what you're doing you can make money quickly with it. If you don't, you can lose money quickly with it. Good fun.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
This is pretty common knowledge with economists so I really didn't elaborate on it.
Listen to Alan Greenspan[^] on gold. Common knowledge with economists might not be reality :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
But the gold standard is still phased out Eddy. And we're comparing apples and oranges here.
I beg to differ; only gold is money. Everything else is credit.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Listen to Alan Greenspan[^] on gold. Common knowledge with economists might not be reality
I'm not convinced Greenspan takes his job seriously. That being said, my point still stands. I'm sure he's aware of the gold standard being gone too. Which is what I mean. Gotta stay on track bro.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I beg to differ; only gold is money. Everything else is credit.
I'm not gonna get into this. I know how precious metals and valuations work. Anyone who spends 1 day online googling "how to get rich" will find some information on gold. I'm talking about governmental currencies. You can't go to the grocery store and buy food with gold. Also, money and currency are not the same thing... read the links Eddy... Currency vs Money: What’s the Difference? - Peter Schiff's Gold News[^]
Jeremy Falcon
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Listen to Alan Greenspan[^] on gold. Common knowledge with economists might not be reality
I'm not convinced Greenspan takes his job seriously. That being said, my point still stands. I'm sure he's aware of the gold standard being gone too. Which is what I mean. Gotta stay on track bro.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
I beg to differ; only gold is money. Everything else is credit.
I'm not gonna get into this. I know how precious metals and valuations work. Anyone who spends 1 day online googling "how to get rich" will find some information on gold. I'm talking about governmental currencies. You can't go to the grocery store and buy food with gold. Also, money and currency are not the same thing... read the links Eddy... Currency vs Money: What’s the Difference? - Peter Schiff's Gold News[^]
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I'm not convinced Greenspan takes his job seriously. That being said, my point still stands. I'm sure he's aware of the gold standard being gone too. Which is what I mean. Gotta stay on track bro.
His job? His job was being the president of the FED. You did not provide any arguments on anything that might supercede it :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I'm talking about governmental currencies. You can't go to the grocery store and buy food with gold.
Haha, I bet you can in Venezuala :D The government can decide that any promise has value; they cannot deny the value of a commonly traded resource :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Also, money and currency are not the same thing... read the links Eddy...
Currency is mandated by the politicians, and worth as much as their promises. Compare that to an industrial resource that has value because it has multiple applications and some special chemical properties. And yes, I prefer money above currency; wouldn't you, knowing that currencies are watered down? :|
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Keep in mind I don't follow bitcoin... but I do follow real currencies. So just to pitch in... extreme volatility can be the result of a couple things... one of which is low volume. Bitcoin is the most popular one out there, so by virtue of that, even though it's volatile I would suspect it would be less volatile than the crypto-currencies that nobody knows about. Volatility is a double-edged sword. If you know what you're doing you can make money quickly with it. If you don't, you can lose money quickly with it. Good fun.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I'm not convinced Greenspan takes his job seriously. That being said, my point still stands. I'm sure he's aware of the gold standard being gone too. Which is what I mean. Gotta stay on track bro.
His job? His job was being the president of the FED. You did not provide any arguments on anything that might supercede it :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I'm talking about governmental currencies. You can't go to the grocery store and buy food with gold.
Haha, I bet you can in Venezuala :D The government can decide that any promise has value; they cannot deny the value of a commonly traded resource :)
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Also, money and currency are not the same thing... read the links Eddy...
Currency is mandated by the politicians, and worth as much as their promises. Compare that to an industrial resource that has value because it has multiple applications and some special chemical properties. And yes, I prefer money above currency; wouldn't you, knowing that currencies are watered down? :|
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
His job? His job was being the president of the FED. You did not provide any arguments on anything that might supercede it
That's because, unlike you, I don't enjoy spending my time arguing online. I prefer talking to people with experience and not arguing online to kill time. ;)
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The government can decide that any promise has value; they cannot deny the value of a commonly traded resource
Apples and oranges man.... apples and oranges. Not gonna bother with this anymore.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Currency is mandated by the politicians, and worth as much as their promises. Compare that to an industrial resource that has value because it has multiple applications and some special chemical properties.
:sigh:
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
And yes, I prefer money above currency; wouldn't you, knowing that currencies are watered down?
Try paying your rent with gold. I'm not anti-gold, but what you're doing is arguing against a point I never made just because you want to argue. That being said, google the word "liquidity" and go read some more. There's a time and place for each. Why I allowed you to sucker me into this I don't know. Bye.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
His job? His job was being the president of the FED. You did not provide any arguments on anything that might supercede it
That's because, unlike you, I don't enjoy spending my time arguing online. I prefer talking to people with experience and not arguing online to kill time. ;)
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
The government can decide that any promise has value; they cannot deny the value of a commonly traded resource
Apples and oranges man.... apples and oranges. Not gonna bother with this anymore.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Currency is mandated by the politicians, and worth as much as their promises. Compare that to an industrial resource that has value because it has multiple applications and some special chemical properties.
:sigh:
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
And yes, I prefer money above currency; wouldn't you, knowing that currencies are watered down?
Try paying your rent with gold. I'm not anti-gold, but what you're doing is arguing against a point I never made just because you want to argue. That being said, google the word "liquidity" and go read some more. There's a time and place for each. Why I allowed you to sucker me into this I don't know. Bye.
Jeremy Falcon
-
You don't know much about economics if you can't even tell me what liquidity means. Have a nice day.
Jeremy Falcon
-
You don't know much about economics if you can't even tell me what liquidity means. Have a nice day.
Jeremy Falcon
-
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Bitcoin -3.59%. It's nowt more than a gamble in a highly volatile market.
..and how is the result based on its ten year performance? Anything that is traded in a volatile market moves up and down fast, but only BC keeps climbing as gold was expected to :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
how is the result based on its ten year performance
You mean apart from the fact it hasn't been around that long and most crypto-currencies are months old???
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Anything that is traded in a volatile market moves up and down fast, but only BC keeps climbing as gold was expected to :)
It's still subject to wild volatility and goes down as well as up.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
how is the result based on its ten year performance
You mean apart from the fact it hasn't been around that long and most crypto-currencies are months old???
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Anything that is traded in a volatile market moves up and down fast, but only BC keeps climbing as gold was expected to :)
It's still subject to wild volatility and goes down as well as up.
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
You mean apart from the fact it hasn't been around that long and most crypto-currencies are months old???
The subject was BitCoin :)
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
It's still subject to wild volatility and goes down as well as up.
Again, what is the long-term trend? :rolleyes: Looks like it be going up from where I'm standing, even if it stumbles now and then.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
Exactly, which is why the banks will need to get involved to regulate it before it really becomes accepted. It'll happen though. Just a matter of time.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
why the banks will need to get involved to regulate
But you know that the main point of cryptocurrencies is that they are decentralized, right? The main point is that no one owns a particular cryptocurrency and therefore cannot affect its value. It doesn't rely on any central authority and so no one can own it or really control it and that is an important part of the entire thing. It's also why, if people decide they trust it then it will work and no one can really regulate it. I learned this from reading: Mastering Bitcoin: Programming the Open Blockchain 2nd Edition - o'Reilly pub - amazon link[^]
-
If you're a risk-taker, then I would say: why not? I would have suggest writing up some sort of service app to constantly check the price and send notifications to you if your coins fall below a certain price that way you minimize the risk of loosing money when they eventually collapse.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
-
CEO at Bitcoin Inc [^] So I have an interest in cryptocurrency - either the biggest scam of all time or the best thing sliced bread - depends who you ask. If you ask the guy in the link he'll tell you it's the best thing, etc. If I read his resume and education history... tells another story. There was also an article in the DM yesterday talking about ICOs - China and SK have already outlawed them and the SEC has prosecuted a couple of companies in the US. And everyone and their dog are getting into blockchain. What to do, what to do... :-)
It's funny how everyone believes the banks are going to squash cryptocurrencies. No they won't, they would just handle it the same way as every other "currency". And earn some money in the process. Authorities is a completely different question, many countries has already outlawed them. Sweden is more pragmatic, the tax authorities simply defines them as a commodity like any other, and demand that the profits are taxed the same way as anything else. You make a profit, you pay a percentage. You have a bitcoin farm, you pay VAT and income tax. Simples.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello