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

Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

cointelegraph.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 163 posts

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#101

Post by cechmaster »

kromokromo wrote: post #71

Bitcoin as a digital store of value is fine. It makes sense to store money in something digital and secure to hedge against local instabilities in currencies, governments etc. People store money in it because it currently secure and it been battle tested, nobody has been able to hack it. However, I am concerned about the security model on a 5-10+ year perspective. Miners secure the blockchain and get paid for it in b…

if quantum computing cracked encryption, everything secured on the internet would be in trouble, not just btc

every 4 years there is a halving event where the btc reward is cut in half. Eventually all btc will be mined and the only role of miners will be to process transactions and they get to keep the fees. that will be the incentive

i agree, Ethereum might be the better approach.

i'm not too concerned about the electricity usage in the long term. for btc it will be less and less profitable for miners to operate consuming large amounts of energy. as the price plateaus and mining rewards decrease, energy consumption should also plateau. that is if energy price stays the same and doesn't become cheaper.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#102

Post by plextoria »

roenxi wrote: post #95
TrackerFF wrote: post #7

Duplicate comment from the other thread: 11 years ago I sold 100 BTC, and made pretty good money. With that said, the more I think about BTC, the less sense it makes to me. Exceedingly few people actually use it for anything practical. The “store of value” functionality has completely eclipsed the practical use that Bitcoin maxis were preaching back then. Since 2016-2017, it seems like people have bought it for the s…

> Exceedingly few people actually use it for anything practical. That is actually fairly common. Gold has been around for millennia, found basically 0 practical applications [0]. The value of something is roughly the marginal difficulty of procuring the thing by whether someone wants to own it, and at the moment nobody can create bitcoin for substantially less than $100k and broadly speaking people will always want t…

Gold is not only used for jewelry. It has many practical applications and is essential for electronics.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#103

Post by ozgrakkurt »

api wrote: post #39
zadler wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First comment of any bitcoin thread on HN is always something like this, generally negative and a bit grumpy.

HN is full of engineers, founders, etc. who kind of resent that there’s a large class of people who got rich doing nothing and creating no value. I get it but I’d say if you’re mad about Bitcoiners you should be a lot more angry about much of the financial industry and property speculators, two other huge groups that get rich without creating much value (or even by creating negative value). There's a lot of value-fre…

Capitalism isn’t generating so much wealth ifaik, life standard of average working person is constantly going down since 1970s

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#104

Post by FollowingTheDao »

api wrote: post #75
bsenftner wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As person with both a finance and economics degrees, bitcoin is a successful fraud. I can list out how they use bitcoin private definitions for standard financial terms, how they do not disclose those differences in conversations with financial professionals using the standard terms and their definitions, and the bitcoin community itself is composed of people that expect someone else did the homework to validate this…

Devils advocate / steel man reply: isn't that what all currencies are? Why does the Federal Reserve US dollar have value? Because people trust other smart people who say they've done the work and trust other smart people who work for the Federal Reserve. Money is a thing people agree upon as a medium of exchange. It is not value itself. Value is the people, places, and things that make up the actual economy. Bitcoin…

> a hard mining limit.

This is what I keep telling people. No government will use BTC because of this.There is a reason the US went off the gold standard, so they can print create money without causing inflation tied to money supply. Inflation now is not tied to money supply, but to money spending. (ie. if people did not spend money buying things there would be no increase in prices.) In the past, if you printed more money inflation would be immediate since it, in effect, immediately devalues the price of gold.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#105

Post by throw0101d »

ozgrakkurt wrote: post #99
Gigachad wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because 10+ years ago it was being used as a cool currency you could generate with your desktop GPU and buy steam games with. Now there doesn’t seem to be any use case other than hoping it goes up higher, and enabling crime.

I understand you disagree with the whole thing but blockchain has a lot of uses already. Most obvious ones are storing money or investment and transferring money. It factually works amazing for these. Assuming you believe in capitalism, people won’t put such enormous amounts of money on something if it has no use. Speculation also applies to stocks in the same way, there is no world where nvidia should be priced like…

> I understand you disagree with the whole thing but blockchain has a lot of uses already.

Not really.

NIST has a good blockchain explainer with a handy flowchart that has questions you should ask to see if blockchain is a useful solution:

* PNG flowchart: https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Projects/enhanced-distribut...

* https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/enhanced-distributed-ledger-t...

* https://www.nist.gov/blockchain

And other things are probably a better fit for the majority of people's needs.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#106

Post by throw0101d »

plextoria wrote: post #102
roenxi wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Exceedingly few people actually use it for anything practical. That is actually fairly common. Gold has been around for millennia, found basically 0 practical applications [0]. The value of something is roughly the marginal difficulty of procuring the thing by whether someone wants to own it, and at the moment nobody can create bitcoin for substantially less than $100k and broadly speaking people will always want t…

Gold is not only used for jewelry. It has many practical applications and is essential for electronics.

> Gold is not only used for jewelry. It has many practical applications and is essential for electronics.

47% of gold is used for jewelry and 6% is used for electronics:

* https://geology.com/minerals/gold/uses-of-gold.shtml#history

You're not wrong, but not entirely right either.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#107

Post by 5350-uiop-1130 »

smeej wrote: post #23
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #11

as someone who follows crypto its crazy how much US dominates the prices during euro/asian hours price will go sideways or go down, then during US hours you get the huge moves up or down i'm guessing all financial markets are like that. it's like US is a behemoth

The big move above $100k happened after 9pm Eastern time.

that would be 6pm pacific time. still falls under reasonable US time.

i think US accounts for 25% or over of global wealth, so it makes sense the big moves come from there.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#108

Post by tasuki »

devjab wrote: post #22
the_duke wrote: post #8

Are there theories why Trump getting elected caused such a spike? Expected sanctions devaluing other currencies, higher risk of conflict (eg Iran -Israel/US war) causing economic instability, ... ?

Weren’t the last spike in crypto prices mostly done by major holders who needed to unload? I admit I don’t follow it very closely but I seem to recall some Danish articles about it essentially being a form of market manipulation largely unrelated to anything that was actually happening in the world. I’m probably wrong though.

Unloading doesn't increase price. Price is driven by supply and demand. Unloading lowers price.

There isn't an "increase price so I can unload" button.

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#109

Post by rabite »

bsenftner wrote: post #57
api wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is full of engineers, founders, etc. who kind of resent that there’s a large class of people who got rich doing nothing and creating no value. I get it but I’d say if you’re mad about Bitcoiners you should be a lot more angry about much of the financial industry and property speculators, two other huge groups that get rich without creating much value (or even by creating negative value). There's a lot of value-fre…

As person with both a finance and economics degrees, bitcoin is a successful fraud. I can list out how they use bitcoin private definitions for standard financial terms, how they do not disclose those differences in conversations with financial professionals using the standard terms and their definitions, and the bitcoin community itself is composed of people that expect someone else did the homework to validate this…

[dead]

Re: Bitcoin price hits $100K for first time in history

#110

Post by IanCal »

gbnwl wrote: post #19
TrackerFF wrote: post #7

Duplicate comment from the other thread: 11 years ago I sold 100 BTC, and made pretty good money. With that said, the more I think about BTC, the less sense it makes to me. Exceedingly few people actually use it for anything practical. The “store of value” functionality has completely eclipsed the practical use that Bitcoin maxis were preaching back then. Since 2016-2017, it seems like people have bought it for the s…

I ran the numbers some time ago, I figured a realistic max value for 1 BTC would be 500k-1M. Extremely curious about your methodology here. Also I'm not sure how to process "the max value is only 5-10x from current prices so the big money has already been made". Can you explain?

"If lots of optimistic things happen, then it can't be more than X" doesn't require predicting the future.

For example, the total value of all gold is something like $10-20T. At 21M coins, if bitcoin fully replaced all gold you'd be looking at something like 500k-1M. I don't really get the difference between M1 and M2 for money supply but this is about the same as all US dollars.

So $500k-$1M seems like a realistic maximum value. That's different from "I think this will happen" and you can have a value much lower than this but the key part here IMO is saying "I cannot see a way it can be higher". I think there are other investments that require significantly less optimism to see 5-10x growth over any reasonable timeframe.

> Also I'm not sure how to process "the max value is only 5-10x from current prices so the big money has already been made". Can you explain?

A maximum upside of 5-10x assuming lots of things go extremely well for your investment requiring massive global shifts is a tricky sell. To make a huge amount of money you have to put a lot on the line.

So I think broadly this is just about whether you read "realistic max value" as "the maximum I expect this to reach" or "scenarios where it goes above this are unrealistic even with a lot of optimism".

Post reply on HN