Live data from Hacker News

Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

bridgewater.com

11–20 of 123 posts

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#12

> while those who are against it (which are a few scared souls cowering in a corner) Way to win over your audience.

HN BTC skeptics are not the target audience. This is an ad targeting rich, nontechnical boomers who are unhappy they missed the ride up.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#13
post #8

The section about the fallacy of limited cryptocurrency supply is one of the key insights missing from many Bitcoin discussions: > For those reasons the “limited supply” argument isn’t as true as it might appear—e.g., if Blackberries were in limited supply they still wouldn’t be worth much because they were replaced by competitors that were more advanced. I agree that Bitcoin is interesting as an alternative asset, b…

Bitcoin is an asset in the same way that a piece of paper with my signature on it is an asset. Why some people think cryptocurrencies are revolutionary is beyond my comprehension.

[deleted]

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#14
post #9

Yesterday bitcoin's average transaction fee was over $31. Bitcoin Cash and Ethereum both exceed bitcoin's transaction count consistently now, with Ethereum far exceeding bitcoin's crippled transaction capacity.

Yes, this was absent from the analysis. Bitcoins security derives from computer power which is currently paid by combination of fees and inflation (mining). We have yet to see what happens to the prices and security when mining dries out. It would also be interesting to see a large market event that causes many people to move bitcoin at once. (What happens to transaction costs? Does this affect perception of bitcoin…

Bitcoin will have to adapt in a big way before inflation stops. It needs to crank transaction volume way up, or otherwise collect fees (for example smart contracts) in order to keep mining profitable.

Scaling only the price of transactions is NOT going to work, but it has quite a bit of runway to figure this out.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#15
I'm surprised that the energy usage axis does not come up in this summary of his thoughts. Isn't that likely to be a factor in bitcoin's growth and long-term survival?

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#16

> while those who are against it (which are a few scared souls cowering in a corner) Way to win over your audience.

HN BTC skeptics are not the target audience. This is an ad targeting rich, nontechnical boomers who are unhappy they missed the ride up.

lot of buzzwords little substance.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#17
Another company shilling a coin, hoping to convince many more greater fools. Only goal of this article is to convince you to buy, and to transfer a part of your wealth to them.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#18

The section about the fallacy of limited cryptocurrency supply is one of the key insights missing from many Bitcoin discussions: > For those reasons the “limited supply” argument isn’t as true as it might appear—e.g., if Blackberries were in limited supply they still wouldn’t be worth much because they were replaced by competitors that were more advanced. I agree that Bitcoin is interesting as an alternative asset, b…

I agree but to play Devil's advocate I think the answer is "the network effect". Facebook could be replaced at any time, yet it continues to dominate social media. At some point, BTC could become, if it has not already, big enough to become self-sustaining.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#19
post #15

I'm surprised that the energy usage axis does not come up in this summary of his thoughts. Isn't that likely to be a factor in bitcoin's growth and long-term survival?

I can see Bitcoin hardfork to POS once the tech has been proven in Ethereum. Bitcoiners only care about the 21 millions hard cap and a secure network, not the exact consensus algorithm used.

Re: Our Thoughts on Bitcoin

#20

> while those who are against it (which are a few scared souls cowering in a corner) Way to win over your audience.

Dalio and Bridgewater's internal culture are famously weird and confrontational[0], so your reaction is probably intended.

[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-02-01/bridge...

Post reply on HN