Very telling, a reply of a sceptic and of a dreamer, everyone else just ignored.
I wish I could be such a dreamer, capable to understand the idea and its potential and have a bit of drive and courage to give it a try.
The first Bitcoin post on HN
271–280 of 302 posts
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you understand the deflation argument. Also Bitcoin can already be split into 10e8 subunits (Satoshis)
1. I do 2. they can be split further, if ever needed. which is what I just said. if enough people agree to it and enough people migrate forward, via cooperation and "this-will-only-hurt-briefly" actions
Splitting does not resolve the issue of deflation that is that a given unit of value (1 btc, 1000 micro-btc post-split, whatever) increases over time. It doesn't matter what you do to it or how you measure the quantity of value - if that same value is worth more tomorrow than it is today, there is a prevailing negative pressure on spending it and the result is that people will prefer to hold on to the currency rather than exchange it.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically true, but we still have the governments to weigh in and try to crush this. Unless they can monetize from BitCoin, they will find a way to kill it - blaming it on funding organized crime and terrorism. "Real world" currency is just too important for them to loose control of it.
Yesterday's congressional hearing made me surer than ever that bitcoin is actually an FBI/ CIA/ NSA/ whoever -made honeypot. Think about it. Bitcoin is robust enough that it could have only been developed with the resources offered by a government, the currency records all transaction histories, and we still have absolutely no idea of who this Satoshi Nakamoto guy is, assuming he's not some government taskforce. Didn…
I doubt it. Reports of the original code suggest it was terrible (I've not seen it) with a lot of bugs.
Of course on that note, if it was developed by the government - who cares? So was Tor.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#274"Why did you buy a bitcoin?" "Because I don't want to enter too late!" The absolute problem with bitcoin is, is that it cannot be used as a currency. If one bitcoin can buy you one "x" today, two "x" tomorrow and in a week only half an "x", what is the point of spending it? Its value fluctuates way too much and that's why so many people are getting on board. They want to be in the elevation towards another all time h…
> If one bitcoin can buy you one "x" today, two "x" tomorrow and in a week only half an "x", what is the point of spending it?
Well let me blow your mind a little bit:
I own some Bitcoin, and I've been spending bitcoins every month for the last four or five months to pay my rent and other living expenses.
And I'm not "cashing out" because I think there's a bubble that will burst. I'm as bullish on Bitcoin as anyone. I fully expect it to hit $10,000 within the next 10 years. I think there's a good chance it'll one day be 10% of the Gross World Product, which would mean they'll be $500k each.
So why am I selling Bitcoins to pay rent? Because I have enough that I can hold onto some of them, enough to be a worthwhile investment, and at the same time sell some off in order to allow me to work on my passion project. That's worth more to me than the abstract possibility of a large windfall in the future.
Hoarding doesn't make sense if you're a human being. If you're a human being, at some point you're like "Fuck it, I'm buying that JetSki!"
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
so you'd have bought about 1.3 million bitcoin There weren't even 1.3 million bitcoin in circulation at that point [1]. If you bought every bitcoin, you could have accumulated about 1.1 million BTC for $850. [1] http://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoins?timespan=all&sh...
Weird, and people are now paying close to that 850usd just for 1 coin. However, if someone had bought coints for even 100usd back in 2010 that would have been weird too and affected the network perhaps a little too negatively.
Not positively?
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you understand the deflation argument. Also Bitcoin can already be split into 10e8 subunits (Satoshis)
1. I do 2. they can be split further, if ever needed. which is what I just said. if enough people agree to it and enough people migrate forward, via cooperation and "this-will-only-hurt-briefly" actions
The deflation argument is about the disincentive to spend your coin, regardless on how they are denominated.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
This post seems like you don't understand the Bitcoin protocol or the exchanges. The current BTC trade goes as: You --> some money handler --> exchange --> bitcoin --> a bunch of nodes which take a cut for processing a transaction (and 20 minutes to hit the network) --> exchange --> another money handler --> recipient. What part of that seems like it has less middlemen? And oh yeah, very few of those parties are beho…
The average credit card processing cost for a retail business where cards are swiped is roughly 1.95% - 2%. The average cost for card-not-present businesses, such as online shops, is roughly 2.30% - 2.50%. However microtransactions cost even more than this and escalate as you have more small transactions. Once you have bitcoins the transaction costs are now 0. Getting USD to bitcoins is obviously hard right now becau…
There are processing fees built into the system, so not it's not 0%. As mining rewards drop these may have to rise in compensation.
Most people can't mine, and would have to eat fees.
Further to that, BTC is a terrible step backwards for consumers as chargeback is not there. The cost for amazon to introduce consumer protections like this (that may be required by law in some places) is likely to dwarf credit card fees.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't buy things in HDTVs so that doesn't really matter.
In the frame of a single transaction, and the point I'm making, it doesn't matter which side of the purchase equation causes the deflationary more-for-your money effect. The point is that the more-for-your-money effect does not stop even discretionary purchases like TV's from happening.
It slows some things like computer purchases. Puts a lag on a variety of things.
Also, why bother to invest money if you can just sit on the cash and benefit from everyone else's economic activity?
Deflation bad.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
The USD is backed by the material value of everything USA, at a minimum. It's practically impossible for the USD to go to absolute zero, there's still some gold in the reserves and oil and mining to be done at absolute worst. Obviously our debts exceed this, but that's a different issue. Say everyone cashed in at once - they'd get a percentage of our debts, not zero, since there's still material value. You can't "und…
US Debts do not exceed the value of everything in the US . They barely exceed 1 year's economic productivity from the US (~15.58 trillion USD). And since the US is not going to stop being a country any time soon (and such a thing would be a calamity which makes national debt completely irrelevant anyway) it has a very long-term ability to make repayments. And this is ignoring the fact that each year the US basically…
One year's worth of productivity does not mean it's redeemable. I'm not sure what the immediate material assets of the USA are, but it's substantially less than the USA is worth, yes.
And anyway, I'm talking absolute worst value, not any sane measure.
Re: The first Bitcoin post on HN
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> A spike in electricity costs would directly effect existing bitcoins' value How? Please explain? It makes mining more expensive, and some people may be switched off mining as a result, but the same number of BTC will be made.
That means the rate of inflation of bitcoins will slow down, thereby causing a spike in the value of existing bitcoins.
For up to about two weeks, until it adjusts to the new, lower norm, and de/inflation continues at the same rate as before. But technically true over that period, yes.