Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bitcoin's Golden Future

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 147 posts

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#121

Post by ericb »

acdha wrote: post #114
ericb wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that simple. Bitcoin has 3 main advantages that can't be easily taken away from it that make things harder for competitors: 1 - Distribution (Metcalfe's law): Metcalfe's law states that the value of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law 2- Schelling Point Bitcoin is the natural…

That's arguing that the past will be like the future when things are still really early. Statistically almost nobody owns or uses Bitcoin, especially when you subtract the Bitcoin proponents who do most of their transactions using something like a credit card which actually uses local currency via Visa or where Bitcoin is converted into real currency immediately by the recipient, and who thus would have very little s…

Coinbase has 10 million users, most of whom are there for bitcoin.

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#122

Post by lostmsu »

simias wrote: post #56
gldalmaso wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a valid point, but, ultimately aren't all or most trades digital today? Are countries exchanging actual loads of gold and/or cash around? If the answer is no, then isn't it all just data on a hard-drive? In that case damaging internet links will have the same effect all around, though information can probably still go in/out in different ways with some effort. Is there some aspect of crypto currency…

The difference IMO is that gold has intrinsic value by virtue of being rare and shiny. I guess the idea is that even if civilization collapses and we return to the stone age gold will still be valuable. Since the use of gold as currency can be traced back at least to 600BCE[1] there's a good reason to believe that. Bitcoins however doesn't really have a intrinsic "rest" value. Anybody can (and many do) spawn a new bl…

If you can carry gold to another country, nothing will stop you from bringing a USB flash with new, longer Bitcoin blockchain, which includes your transaction to send BTC to the receiver.

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#123

Post by hossbeast »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #120
hossbeast wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even your example of faster speed is subjective. Some people may prefer the limitation of less speed. It's subjective.

Some people - yes. Some people prefer all sorts of things. Some people may prefer jumping off a bridge. That's irrelevant. On average, people will prefer an objectively better thing to an objectively worse thing and pay more for it

You've just used the term "objective" to describe what the term "objective" means. Surely you see the problem?

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#124

Post by acdha »

ericb wrote: post #121
acdha wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's arguing that the past will be like the future when things are still really early. Statistically almost nobody owns or uses Bitcoin, especially when you subtract the Bitcoin proponents who do most of their transactions using something like a credit card which actually uses local currency via Visa or where Bitcoin is converted into real currency immediately by the recipient, and who thus would have very little s…

Coinbase has 10 million users, most of whom are there for bitcoin.

How many of them are active? How many hold non-trivial balances? Most importantly, how many sales would legal merchants lose if those users jumped ship or lost interest?

Again, my point is simply that there's little holding anyone who hasn't made a huge investment specifically in Bitcoin. If you have $10 equivalent sitting in an account and CitiCoin™ launches next week with attractive terms and mainstream merchant acceptance, are you going to think twice about bailing? Alternately, if law enforcement cracks down on the money laundering, etc. and prices drop, how many people will lose interest if it won't make them rich?

A key point here: of the comparatively few merchants who accept BTC, how many do their business primarily in Bitcoin and don't quickly convert to something else? That's the only group with a significant commitment to continued use; everyone else can switch on a whim.

That's the difference between a pure fiat currency like Bitcoin and something backed by a national government. Bitcoin has no inherent value beyond voluntary group consensus, which means that a panic, messy fork, or disinterest has no natural floor on how far it can fall. In contrast, USD are backed by one of the major world economies, hundreds of millions of people need them to pay taxes, and billions of dollars are paid to government employees, contracts, benefits, etc. Again, that's not immunity from problems but it's a huge inertial weight moderating swings.

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#125

Post by sbenitoj »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #117
sbenitoj wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The maximum speed or acceleration abilities of a car are objective metrics, but how much people actually value those things is subjective. Value is subjective, each person values the same objective metrics differently (e.g. soccer moms generally don't value sports cars as much as single guys, if they did then we'd see a bunch of soccer moms driving their kids around in sports).

yes, but a faster car with all other features being equal gives you objectively more features. There is a reason BMW costs more than a Honda civic. Right? Or else, if there is no reason whatsoever, Honda should be able to advertise in a clever manner and sell that Honda civic for the same price as a BMW 7 series or a Tesla. I mean if it's all subjective, right? But we can all agree that no matter what a Honda civic w…

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not just trolling and you're actually trying to understand whether value is objective or subjective. Assuming you are, read the following link and let me know if you still think value is objective, and if so what parts specifically do you disagree with:

https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#126

Post by ktta »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #108
ktta wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each one of your cases can be debunked. Stocks only have value when SEC deems that it can have value. There are people who would love to live in a cold climate for whom land in a warm climate has no value. BMW costs more than Honda because people are willing to pay that much for it, which is how BMW sets the price. All of your cases are about subjective value. Take out the buyer with personal interests on the other s…

ehhhh, no. Stocks do not only have value when SEC deems that it can have value. That is completely incorrect. SEC simply regulates equity issuance, it doesn't set the price of each stock. BMW costs more than honda because it is objectively a better car. By objectively identifiable metrics. Yes, it's true there are some people who love cold climates. But in the US people are moving from cold climates to warmer climate…

> SEC ... doesn't set the price of each stock

No it doesn't, but SEC has the power to allow the stock to get traded in the first place. So the value is subject to SEC's presence. If there is no SEC, there is no 'stock' for you to get dividends from.

> BMW costs more than honda because it is objectively a better car. By objectively identifiable metrics.

You discount the people do don't give care about the objective metrics. There's a lot of personal preference involved when one chooses a car to buy (apart from buying power).

>But in the US people are moving from cold climates to warmer climates, on average

Last time I checked, US has of 4% of the world's population. I'd wager more than 4% of the world would love to move to a colder climate.

>So, no, you are completely wrong.

I don't think any of the facts I've stated are. If you're talking about my opinion that there is only subjective value, well, that's subjective too :)

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#127

Post by prostoalex »

lostmsu wrote: post #122
simias wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference IMO is that gold has intrinsic value by virtue of being rare and shiny. I guess the idea is that even if civilization collapses and we return to the stone age gold will still be valuable. Since the use of gold as currency can be traced back at least to 600BCE[1] there's a good reason to believe that. Bitcoins however doesn't really have a intrinsic "rest" value. Anybody can (and many do) spawn a new bl…

If you can carry gold to another country, nothing will stop you from bringing a USB flash with new, longer Bitcoin blockchain, which includes your transaction to send BTC to the receiver.

That's after you convince the rest of the operating nodes in that country that the blockchain version on your USB is indeed the greatest, and everyone should just migrate to that.

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#128

Post by prostoalex »

Taek wrote: post #111
delegate wrote: post #6

Bitcoin and other crypto require a well functioning internet infrastructure, otherwise it's just data on a hard-drive. Disconnect a country from the Internet (or filter the traffic) and you're forking the chain. Spend on both networks by buying other (unfiltered) crypto. There are states (even large ISPs) that can do that. Also, the first thing to go in case of global conflict is the global Internet. Countries will t…

> Bitcoin and other crypto require a well functioning internet infrastructure, otherwise it's just data on a hard-drive. Amazingly, not really. Bitcoin is a currency that's built to be disaster-proof, including world-ending scenarios like nuclear war between superpowers. You really just need 3 things: 1. A computer that can validate the chain. 2. The longest chain. This can be given to you via usb stick if the Intern…

> This can be given to you via usb stick if the Internet is down.

What's the verification mechanism if you're given two or three USB sticks all swearing they have the latest and greatest blockchain?

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#129

Post by prostoalex »

elevensies wrote: post #64
delegate wrote: post #6

Bitcoin and other crypto require a well functioning internet infrastructure, otherwise it's just data on a hard-drive. Disconnect a country from the Internet (or filter the traffic) and you're forking the chain. Spend on both networks by buying other (unfiltered) crypto. There are states (even large ISPs) that can do that. Also, the first thing to go in case of global conflict is the global Internet. Countries will t…

This is something I've been wondering about. Maybe someone with more bitcoin expertise could answer. Is there more mining capacity inside China than outside China? If so, and the Chinese government used their well-known firewall against Bitcoin for a matter of days to weeks, would Chinese miners have the longer chain? And thus the chain? I guess what I'm wondering is if the government of China has the ability to DOS…

The attack you're describing is analogous to 50%+1 attack.

The chain will fork, and after Bitcoin + Bitcoin Cash and Ethereum Classic + Ethereum it's reasonable to assume both versions will co-exist to some degree.

Re: Bitcoin's Golden Future

#130

Post by prostoalex »

ISL wrote: post #30
rugffgbv wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only it's slow, but transaction fees are ridiculously high. $4.3 currently. I go to shop and pay $0.5 for 2kg of potatoes (or a bottle of beer), and pay $4.3 fee, and wait 1 hour for confirmations?

If you make a consumer trade with Fidelity, the trading fee is $5. For better or worse, Bitcoin has evolved into a financial-scale product, no longer something one would use to buy $0.50 of potatoes. (P.S. $0.50 for 2kg of potatoes or a bottle of beer? both of those are a great deal)

> Bitcoin has evolved into a financial-scale product, no longer something one would use to buy $0.50 of potatoes.

Well, before "evolving" so elegantly it was pitched as a replacement to credit/debit card systems (which would charge a whole lot less for a basic $10 transaction), and prior to that as a final answer to micropayments on the Web (I am guessing charging $0.001 to read an article is off the books now). And somewhere along the evolvement it was supposed to be a payment mechanism for calling other people's APIs and various Web services.

What's the next step in this evolution chain? Service for realtors where the transaction fee is 6% of the value of one's house?

Post reply on HN