BitCoin
-
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... :-)
I could bite my ass not having bought bitcoins two years ago! Now I would bite my ass if I would buy bitcoins! The whole thing is too volatile and in-transparent to me and I don't understand enough about it to risk my money. The cryptocurrency aside, the technology behind, block-chain, might be more interesting, depending in which industry you are in.
-
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... :-)
You must remember: Bitcoin existed long before "Bitcoin inc". Bitcoin itself not a scam. It may-or-may not be overvalued. Just like a single tulip cost bazillions in the 17th century ([Tulip mania - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip\_mania)). Tulips were not a scam either, just extremely overvalued. As for "Bitcoin inc" they might be scammers, does not mean that Bitcoin is.
... such stuff as dreams are made on
-
Now this is only my opinion, but I don't think that crypto-currencies will ever become truly mainstream. The primary reason is that the central banks spent several centuries getting a nearly world-wide monopoly on our money supplies. They are tolerating this novelty for the time being but if they ever begin to expand beyond their little niche, the banks are going to wield their inexhaustible political power to squash them into oblivion.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
Foothill wrote:
political power to squash them into oblivion.
The only way to do that is by destroying the internet. The appeal of blockchain is that there is no central power able to control it. There are hard forks that can undermine it, but never kill it.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
-
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:
. Banks aren't just going to give up their power willy-nilly. They're going to have some control over it. And since they have the money right now, they can watch Bitcion et al to see what happens then develop their own... to keep control.
I am wondering about this. And I still don't see a way they can do it, even if they create their own, they can't stop Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from existing, plus the base of blockchain is no centralized control so... I see this as a point of no return, where banks can either board the train or be left behind. PS: I saw the pointless discussion you got drawn into. Economics is hard, many people don't get it. It's hard to imagine value that's not based on a touchable asset (like gold). Gold does not back the currencies anymore, but they are an asset. Bitcoin is an asset (crypto asset) what I find hard to grasp is how much of it is a bubble, as it's hard to see what backs it, except for computing power and electricity.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
-
raddevus wrote:
and therefore cannot affect its value.
Which value? It is the result of a calculation: it has no value in itself.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
-
Exactly. It has (or doesn't have) value all in relation to what the people who use it or don't use it believe. However, because management of cryptocurrencies are decentralized it _may_ allow them to have value that is _more_ based upon the actual people and not a particular authority (govt, bank, etc) suddenly says that it has a particular value. It's an interesting concept.
-
Foothill wrote:
political power to squash them into oblivion.
The only way to do that is by destroying the internet. The appeal of blockchain is that there is no central power able to control it. There are hard forks that can undermine it, but never kill it.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
As a technology, the blockchain has the potential to replace normal business ledgers especially for inter-organizational transfers but crypto-currencies are competing against the banks. So, if they ever start replacing actual money for everyday transactions beyond their niche, the banks will react in one of two ways. 1.) the banks are going to drive down their worth to near zero, buy them all up, thereby removing them from circulation or 2.) force governments to regulate them back into their niche. I make this argument from one idea: the central bank's are all about controlling money, if they cannot control it, they will either find a way to control it or force it out of the market.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
-
A bit more than a number which is a result of a calculation. How much "42" and "1337" is worth a kilo of bread? But hey, if people want to buy numbers, I think I have some unused ones to sell.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
-
As a technology, the blockchain has the potential to replace normal business ledgers especially for inter-organizational transfers but crypto-currencies are competing against the banks. So, if they ever start replacing actual money for everyday transactions beyond their niche, the banks will react in one of two ways. 1.) the banks are going to drive down their worth to near zero, buy them all up, thereby removing them from circulation or 2.) force governments to regulate them back into their niche. I make this argument from one idea: the central bank's are all about controlling money, if they cannot control it, they will either find a way to control it or force it out of the market.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
Foothill wrote:
they will either find a way to control it or force it out of the market.
I just believe they will fail on both.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
-
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
About Hyperinflation. I have been working on a theory about that so let me know what you think if you so choose to read this. When it comes to our commonly traded tenders, you sort of have to throw common sense out the window up to a point. Fiat currency does not behave like normal commodity backed currencies. Instead of being pegged to a commodity, fiat currency becomes a commodity itself which allows its price to fluctuate and this is where things can get a little weird. Inflation has two ways of explaining it. One is the commonly held idea that things naturally become more expensive over time. Now, when you apply this to a long-term valuation chart where each inflation drives up the cost a little each year, the curve becomes parabolic (x2). Approaching inflation from this point of view, it becomes inevitable that hyperinflation will occur for any fiat currency. Another approach is not that everything is becoming more expensive but it is that our fake currencies are loosing a little bit of their value each year (a.k.a. devaluation). Since fiat currency is not physical and has no intrinsic value, it is impossible to apply any sort of science to it therefore using economics to analyze or predict its movements is pointless. So, if we approach this from the devaluation point of view, as long as people think that the currency has at least some value, hyperinflation cannot happen. The valuation curve will drop steadily for a while but will level off and decrease very slowly. Math: since I forgot how to write up those sum formulas, I will use spreadsheet formulas. For this, let A1 be 100 for both approaches where i is the inflation rate for that year Inflation (adding a percentage): A2 = A1 + (A1 * i) Deflation (subtracting a percentage): A2 = A1 - (A1 * i) When graphing inflation adding a percentage, eventually it will lead to a nearly vertical line straight up. When graphing devaluation subtracting a percentage, eventually it will lead to a nearly horizontal line into perpetuity. My argument in support of devaluation is based on observations that the economies of scale and technology have driven down the cost of doing business far more than inflation has increased it since the mid 1970's when the U.S. ended the gold standard. To get an accurate comparison, you need a common point of reference. I like to use gold as a reference because it always had, still has, and always will have intrinsic value. If you compare how
-
Foothill wrote:
they will either find a way to control it or force it out of the market.
I just believe they will fail on both.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
I too want to believe that cypto-currencies will wrest control of our money out of the hands of the central banks but history shows that entire countries can be brought to their knees by the banks. The pragmatist in me acknowledges that the banks will most likely win in the end.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); } Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
. Banks aren't just going to give up their power willy-nilly. They're going to have some control over it. And since they have the money right now, they can watch Bitcion et al to see what happens then develop their own... to keep control.
I am wondering about this. And I still don't see a way they can do it, even if they create their own, they can't stop Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from existing, plus the base of blockchain is no centralized control so... I see this as a point of no return, where banks can either board the train or be left behind. PS: I saw the pointless discussion you got drawn into. Economics is hard, many people don't get it. It's hard to imagine value that's not based on a touchable asset (like gold). Gold does not back the currencies anymore, but they are an asset. Bitcoin is an asset (crypto asset) what I find hard to grasp is how much of it is a bubble, as it's hard to see what backs it, except for computing power and electricity.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
Fabio Franco wrote:
And I still don't see a way they can do it, even if they create their own, they can't stop Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from existing, plus the base of blockchain is no centralized control so...
Drown the market with alternatives of lower quality.
Fabio Franco wrote:
Economics is hard, many people don't get it. It's hard to imagine value that's not based on a touchable asset (like gold).
You mean things like labor, or idea's? Knowledge? Living in a country where summer is more than three months worth of rain?
Fabio Franco wrote:
Bitcoin is an asset (crypto asset) what I find hard to grasp is how much of it is a bubble, as it's hard to see what backs it, except for computing power and electricity.
It is not "backed" by computing power nor by electricity. It has no other use outside of being usefull as a currency, meaning that that is the only thing giving it value. As for the bubble-idea, it is not yet even a mainstream-thing.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
A bit more than a number which is a result of a calculation. How much "42" and "1337" is worth a kilo of bread? But hey, if people want to buy numbers, I think I have some unused ones to sell.
* CALL APOGEE, SAY AARDWOLF * GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X * Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game. * I'm a puny punmaker.
That's mostly a problem of acceptance than value. I bet that if I pick a 100USD bill and go to the market and try to buy a bread, they won't sell me a bread that costs 1EUR. Why? Because only EUR is accepted in my country. A smart cashier might put 1EUR from his pocket and let me take the bread, keeping the 100USD for him. But that's another story... :-)
-
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[^]
raddevus wrote:
But you know that the main point of cryptocurrencies is that they are decentralized, right?
Yup yup. But what I'm getting at is that they'll never be fully adopted as the defacto currency until the government and banks get involved. People with power tend not to give it up so easily.
raddevus wrote:
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.
Totally, but it's like the Internet all over again. The more popular it gets the more the the government will get involved, which they've been doing with online matters more and more these days.
Jeremy Falcon
-
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[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Looks like it be going up from where I'm standing, even if it stumbles now and then.
That is an overly optimistic view and I'm an optimist.
-
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
That is not an unreasonable approach.
-
You must remember: Bitcoin existed long before "Bitcoin inc". Bitcoin itself not a scam. It may-or-may not be overvalued. Just like a single tulip cost bazillions in the 17th century ([Tulip mania - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip\_mania)). Tulips were not a scam either, just extremely overvalued. As for "Bitcoin inc" they might be scammers, does not mean that Bitcoin is.
... such stuff as dreams are made on
Fair point and agreed that the company mentioned does come across as a possible scam - may not be, but that's how it looks.
-
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
. Banks aren't just going to give up their power willy-nilly. They're going to have some control over it. And since they have the money right now, they can watch Bitcion et al to see what happens then develop their own... to keep control.
I am wondering about this. And I still don't see a way they can do it, even if they create their own, they can't stop Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from existing, plus the base of blockchain is no centralized control so... I see this as a point of no return, where banks can either board the train or be left behind. PS: I saw the pointless discussion you got drawn into. Economics is hard, many people don't get it. It's hard to imagine value that's not based on a touchable asset (like gold). Gold does not back the currencies anymore, but they are an asset. Bitcoin is an asset (crypto asset) what I find hard to grasp is how much of it is a bubble, as it's hard to see what backs it, except for computing power and electricity.
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson ---- Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
Fabio Franco wrote:
I am wondering about this. And I still don't see a way they can do it, even if they create their own, they can't stop Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies from existing, plus the base of blockchain is no centralized control so... I see this as a point of no return, where banks can either board the train or be left behind.
Yeah, I have no idea how it's going to be done either. It's a new world out there. Maybe they'll have government specific. Who knows, as we can only guess at this point. But I'm willing to bet something will change about it before the banks are like cool "it's gonna be the new dollar now." :)
Fabio Franco wrote:
PS: I saw the pointless discussion you got drawn into. Economics is hard, many people don't get it. It's hard to imagine value that's not based on a touchable asset (like gold). Gold does not back the currencies anymore, but they are an asset. Bitcoin is an asset (crypto asset) what I find hard to grasp is how much of it is a bubble, as it's hard to see what backs it, except for computing power and electricity.
You are correct sir. When it comes to money and economics there are so many pretenders out there, and we've unfortunately found one on CP. Anyway, to your point, kinda makes you wonder, I know there are limits to the amount of BitCoin that can be generated, but in the future with quantum computing becoming mainstream... if we'll effectively be able to generate the max amount of currencies quickly and thus deflate them from popping the bubble instantly. We can only guess, but the future is crazy to think about. About to read your hyperinflation post...
Jeremy Falcon
-
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... :-)
Giskard: Bitcoin is of course part a scam and part thin slice bread, or better yet, snake oil or cough syrup... ;P Joking aside you can comparte Bitcoin to the birth of Coca Cola... it started as a do it all, health beverage based on Coca leaves (where you extract Cocaine) and Kola nut which is a fruit rich in caffeine. It was served at room temperature so tasted like sh*t... that was John Pemberton and if you come to Atlanta there's a beautiful place called Pemberton plaza which houses "The World of Coca Cola". Alas, as a medicine, Coca Cola was a deep scam and today, original Coca Cola would be banned as it contains not only high concentrations of caffeine, but also traces of Cocaine. But, ironically Pemberton never became rich from his invention. He died of stomach cancer, being a morphine addict and sold most of his rights to the beverage to keep up with his addictions. But Coca Cola, later became a wild success and today it's an empire (based on Atlanta) which sells billions and has hundreds different brands and tastes. But the "secret sauce" of Coca-Cola still is "ground zero" for the full corporation. So with that in mind, Bitcoin might fare equally well. In the future we might have a Satoshi Nakamoto plaza somewhere in the US, Japan, Russia or whatever. Millions would be made with Bitcoin, but don't just yet dump you're full life savings on it. Dutch family sells everything to bet on bitcoins You must follow the "Wences rule for investing", created by my fellow Latin American Wenceslao Casares (sounds Russian, but he's actually from Argentina, which casually means "Place where the money is"). The simple formula for becoming a bitcoin millionaire, according to one of its innovators Just take 1% of your current state and invest it on Bitcoin, and let it mature (or rot) for 5 to 10 years. If all goes to hell, you've only lost 1% of your household. If everything goes as planned, you would have a 500% return on your investment. In the mean time, just buy the world a Coke and live in perfect harmony.... Mad Men "I'd like to buy the world a Coke" series finale, Coca Cola TV ad
-
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
Exactly. I don't think banks will squash them... they can't. Technology is bigger than banks. I totally agree they'll accept them after they make changes to keep them in the power loop.
Jeremy Falcon