It's kinda cool to be living in a tulip era like this. I wish there was some way I could make a long term bet against the the price of bitcoin, say it's price 10 years from now. Of course, this is impossible. If there is anything we have learned, and I can demonstrate that I predicted 5 years ago, it's that the definition of bitcoin is infinitely divisible. I could claim a bitcoin fork in 2027 is the true bitcoin, an…
BTC's graph is hilarious: http://i.imgur.com/IWwOgm9.png
Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
61–70 of 173 posts
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#62I see so many people dissing the technology and rehashing old arguments. You shouldn't consider Bitcoin as a currency but as a better form of Gold. Like gold it has a limited amount available: ~180k tons of gold and eventually 21 million bitcoins. Like gold it is a good store of value (especially as more people are dropping their gold to purchase BTC). Unlike Gold you can send it to someone else online and that means…
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't make them wrong. I find the idea of crypto currency, especially bitcoin, very interesting. I just have a very hard time seeing how it's actually useful. It can't handle very many transactions per minute. And the thing that supposed to make it so great is that no one controls it. But if bitcoin becomes really important then people will want to control a lot of the mining power. Pretty soon you end up with a gr…
why is it useful? you can store and instantly send any arbitrary amount of money anywhere on the planet and it is the hardest (impossible?) for a government to steal it from you
you can store and send any arbitrary amount of database entries
and wait for several minutes while your transaction is processedRe: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin does seem to be the best payment technology for online illegal transactions. Albeit, one could argue those shouldn't be 'real' in the first place.
No, it’s a store of value like a rolex or a pot of gold. Except much more fungible. And it increases in value relatively every time new “real” money is created. I don’t agree that it’s just for illegal transactions.
It may be more fungible at the moment, but is it anywhere near as safe? Gold goes up and down but nowhere near to the degree we've seen with bitcoin. Add a minimum it's useful in manufacturing so even if the price crash there would still be people to buy it. Rolexes are useful, they have an intrinsic value/use. Bitcoin is only valuable as a medium of exchange.
Bitcoin could effectively disappear. I'm not saying it looks likely at the moment but even if your holdings are very large all it takes is the market to decide to stop accepting/exchanging it.
I think that's FAR more likely than gold or Rolexes.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#65People have been saying since it was valued at $1 that it was overvalued, or nobody should pay $1 for a virtual coin. Same people are still arguing the same thing 5 years later...
Doesn't make them wrong. I find the idea of crypto currency, especially bitcoin, very interesting. I just have a very hard time seeing how it's actually useful. It can't handle very many transactions per minute. And the thing that supposed to make it so great is that no one controls it. But if bitcoin becomes really important then people will want to control a lot of the mining power. Pretty soon you end up with a gr…
Why is it so hard to see?
Whenever you send money somewhere electronically, a middleman takes a cut. With Bitcoin there is no middleman.
It's that easy.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably when it is used mainly as actual currency, not for speculation or black market exchanges and laundering.
I was skeptical of Bitcoin for a long time, but the other day I was on a (legal) website and they had it listed as a payment method, right next to Visa. Seeing it there really showed me how far it's come.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#67Is anyone worried about that unsustainable bitcoin energy usage article on HN a few days ago? Would Litecoin have those same problems?
Wouldn't that happen to any general crypto currency that got popular?
Scrypt (LTC) and KECCAK-256 (ETH) are less power intensive than SHA-256 (BTC). Those are just proof-of-work.
Proof-of-stake or proof-of-importance would have barely any power footprint, but there are still debates about whether they could replace PoW and offer similar security guarantees.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#68The graph in the article (1), showing a much steeper slope than other bubbles is fascinating for a couple of reasons: 1) The total SCALE of the bubble is much much smaller than say the tech bubble - the 280 stocks representative of the tech bubble fell almost $1.7 TRILLION in 52 weeks (2) vs the total crypto market cap @ the moment of ~180 billion. 2) The total scale of the Crypto bubble has MORE potential than stock…
For comparison: the founders seed round of Uber grew their investment 65,000×, tulip prices increased by at most 5,000× during tulip mania, some "best performing stocks" over the last century are reported as growing 1,000×.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been into Bitcoin since 2011, and it's interesting that people are still making tulip comparisons 6 years later. Tulip mania itself only lasted about 9 months. I wonder how long Bitcoin will have to hold out before the tulip argument could no longer be made.
Probably when it is used mainly as actual currency, not for speculation or black market exchanges and laundering.
I suspect virtually all of it. People dismiss this viewpoint because they attribute it to Silk Road type activities, which can't explain the scale, but what I'm talking about is millionaires and billionaires funneling wealth out of China etc.
One thing that's certain is that bitcoin isn't really a currency. When you pay with bitcoin, the value is tied to and converted to USD, and the price paid is tied to USD. Bitcoin isn't the currency in those transactions, USD is. Bitcoin is more like a decentralized anonymous Western Union than it is a currency.
I also don't understand what proponents think the endgame is for bitcoin as an investment-grade asset. Everyone who buys some just becomes the world's first trillionaires, and we become a 2-tiered society of people who bought bitcoin and people who didn't?
Bitcoin might have some serious world-changing implications, but I seriously doubt it being an investable asset is one of them.
Re: Bitcoin Gets Close to $5,000
#70What will stop bitcoin's price from going up? I just keep thinking that other than new laws or something getting hacked there is no reason for the price to not just keep creeping up.
At some point this would cause people to build stashes of tokens instead of investing in real businesses with real production capacity.
When this trend would become widespread enough, it would eventually cause global production capacity to drop. That's right, when enough people do it, token hoarding displaces investment in businesses and factories and lowers global production capacity. This means token hoarding causes a future drop in things available to buy with these very tokens.
Eventually there will be people who want to buy real things with their stock of tokens. The tokens will be chasing fewer goods which would mean prices for stuff would rise (tokens would lose value). This could happen suddenly when people with large stockpiles of tokens notice that value is dropping and that there are tons of other tokens waiting on the sideline ready to make it drop even further.
Hoarders might rush to get rid of their stockpile all at the same time before they're worthless which would cause their fall to worthlessness. This drop would bring the tokens closer to their natural intrinsic value of zero. The cycle can then start again, such is aggregate economics.
The 1920s and 1930s suffered from this type of production drop but with gold tied currencies instead of cryptocoins. It happened to a lesser extent in 2007 when western world central banks failed to keep inflation rates high enough.
It's important for the world's sake to not let deflationary currencies become too popular. When savings or financial promises are insufficiently tied to future production or to accumulation of real goods, there will be disappointment when many people try to exchange them for real stuff. That is true for crypto currencies as well as government currencies (that is why the system is designed to make banks invest people's money in real businesses and minimize the proportion of money that is stockpiled idly).
It's true that crypto currencies are currently not widely held enough to significantly affect the aggregate economy but speculation already keeps them volatile and the knowledge that as they get more popular, there will be more macroeconomic pressures towards volatility keeps the speculation wild and cryptocoins unstable.
Currencies that are not designed to lose value over time can not be stable. Intrinsically worthless tokens engineered to have better than market risk adjusted, liquidity adjusted, real returns compared to real productive investment will always fluctuate increasingly wildly as they get more popular.