121–130 of 530 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin disrupts central bank, not payment networks. Lightning [1] as layer 2 on top of Bitcoin adheres to trustless and p2p ideals, and is actually the competition for Visa. [1]: https://lightning.network/ Edit: added link
Lightning, technically speaking, is garbage. 10k transactions per second ETH2 layer 1 + zk roll-ups providing throughout multiplication threatens VISA.
Do you care to elaborate?
Or is it some nudge-nudge-wink-wink situation where everyone, including the IRS, ignores such a thing unless the sums involved are large.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin disrupts central bank, not payment networks. Lightning [1] as layer 2 on top of Bitcoin adheres to trustless and p2p ideals, and is actually the competition for Visa. [1]: https://lightning.network/ Edit: added link
Lightning, technically speaking, is garbage. 10k transactions per second ETH2 layer 1 + zk roll-ups providing throughout multiplication threatens VISA.
Bitcoin is digital gold, God's money. When it comes to volatility, it's up to humans to "fix" it. The fix means we all have to "buy" into it, that is, blindly believe the problem will be fixed somehow. Stop selling, keep holding. Maybe, forever. :)
It's probably not going to be fixed. Volatility is likely an inherent property due to its limited supply.
https://bitflate.org/post/2020/05/10/bitcoin-volatility.html
Maybe I don't understand it correctly, but after having recently done my taxes, it seems to me you'd generate a capital gain or loss that has to be captured on IRS Form 8949 every time such a thing triggered bitcoin to be converted to USD, goods or services. Or is it some nudge-nudge-wink-wink situation where everyone, including the IRS, ignores such a thing unless the sums involved are large.
One of the reasons I'm bullish on Bitcoin over the next decade is precisely because of the anti-BTC sentiment on this board.
The anti-BTC sentiment on HN puzzles me. There is no intelligent critique. The doubts that are endlessly repeated here have been addressed in detail, and are available online. Scaling and transaction throughput, energy consumption, state attacks, protocol weakness and lack of backing have all been responded to, to a sufficiently satisfactory degree.
That's an opinion, not a fact.
Bitcoin transaction costs are very high so I’m assuming all these payment processor transactions will be off-chain. Do you think that having so many off-chain transactions that are essentially converting USD reduces the perceived value of BTC or raises it?
I'd say it adds a lot of value.
The problem with using Bitcoin for payments is volatility. Bitcoin's price is volatile. Bitcoin supporters say volatility will go down "at some point". The logic is pretty silly. Bitcoin is money for the people. But when the super rich people adopt it, volatility will go down. They have more money. The Bitcoin money "tank" will be bigger. Its volatile flow will go down. Bitcoin is digital gold, God's money. When it c…
This means Bitcoin's value is based on completely ephemeral feelings, and the size of its network -- both things that can disappear overnight. The most solid thing you can say about it is that you can use it to get around government sanctions, which is not exactly high praise.
One of the reasons I'm bullish on Bitcoin over the next decade is precisely because of the anti-BTC sentiment on this board.
The anti-BTC sentiment on HN puzzles me. There is no intelligent critique. The doubts that are endlessly repeated here have been addressed in detail, and are available online. Scaling and transaction throughput, energy consumption, state attacks, protocol weakness and lack of backing have all been responded to, to a sufficiently satisfactory degree.
1. Avoiding Venezuelan hyper-inflation - it is a use-case, but doesn't really apply to the United States for example.
2. Store of value - volatility is way too high and there are much better alternatives (Treasury bonds)
3. Evading capital controls - it is a use-case, but not really applicable to most citizens in the US, and is unlikely to be applicable in the future.
4. Settlement layer for banks - banks already have a settlement layer that works for them.
The downsides of a decentralized system vs. a centralized system are an increased cost (in energy, computation, time, money, etc.) of transaction. So what justifies the cost?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Institutional and retail investors are just starting to pile on and there will be potentially massive gains to be had in the near to mid term before the bottom falls out. Long term? Probably not smart. Safe to get in now? Debatable, pretty high risk. But if you have a bunch of coins laying around and you're willing to gamble a bit longer...
Wow, that is pretty basic economic fallacy. Whether you hold coins today or not should not impact an investment decision. If the BTC you bought 10 years ago for $100 is worth $100,000 today, and a couple of weeks from now the price collapses and is worth $100 again, you have still lost $100,000. Just the same as if you paid $100,000 for your BTC today. Only difference would be tax liability.
There is no such thing as house money.