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

The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

blog.rongarret.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–188 of 188 posts

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#181

Post by Fjolsvith »

brianwawok wrote: post #156
wpietri wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me to see this downvoted. One fundamental of investing is that stocks represent an economically productive asset. In contrast, commodities just sit there. If I buy a chunk of a company, that company is working to become a bigger, more effective, more value-generating company. If I buy an ounce of gold, it stays an ounce of gold. Index funds represent a broader bet still. Because they're composed of many…

It doesn't surprise me. HN is very pro tech, even when they don't understand the foundation of what they are betting on. I own 1 share of a SP500 ETF. That gives me an actual fractional ownership of Apple. That gives me an actual cut of the dividends of real american companies. It has an actual meaning of what you own. What does 1 BTC give you? What is the fundamental purpose of a BTC? Tulips went up in price too, bu…

What if you owned a US dollar (an actual dollar bill)? That gives you an actual fractional ownership of what? An American government? No. You have a currency, a store of value that can be used to pay a debt.

Owning a BTC is the same as owning a dollar, functionally. The main difference is that dollars, on the whole, tend to lose value, and that BTC tends to gain.

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#182

Post by Fjolsvith »

wpietri wrote: post #154
alexasmyths wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SP500 has been growing consistently, has for quite a long time, and it's a bet on the future growth of the American economy. There will be ups and downs, but by enlarge, steady growth. BTC has been on a wild ride, and could evaporate at any moment. I don't think it will, but it could, since there's no reason for anyone anywhere to own it. There's no question the safer bet is S&P 500. Now - in the range of outcome…

It surprises me to see this downvoted. One fundamental of investing is that stocks represent an economically productive asset. In contrast, commodities just sit there. If I buy a chunk of a company, that company is working to become a bigger, more effective, more value-generating company. If I buy an ounce of gold, it stays an ounce of gold. Index funds represent a broader bet still. Because they're composed of many…

I beg to differ with regards to your valuation of Bitcoin. It, like gold, has a practical use value. It, also like gold, has a value attributed to it due to it's rarity. However, Bitcoin has an advantage over gold, in that it can be traded without having to be transported _at cost_. This is why so many people are bullish on it.

Oh, and so many people "who are in control of it" have too much of their own money invested into it to allow it to fail.

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#183

Post by saalweachter »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #182
wpietri wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me to see this downvoted. One fundamental of investing is that stocks represent an economically productive asset. In contrast, commodities just sit there. If I buy a chunk of a company, that company is working to become a bigger, more effective, more value-generating company. If I buy an ounce of gold, it stays an ounce of gold. Index funds represent a broader bet still. Because they're composed of many…

I beg to differ with regards to your valuation of Bitcoin. It, like gold, has a practical use value. It, also like gold, has a value attributed to it due to it's rarity. However, Bitcoin has an advantage over gold, in that it can be traded without having to be transported _at cost_. This is why so many people are bullish on it. Oh, and so many people "who are in control of it" have too much of their own money investe…

The advantage of gold over Bitcoin is that you can evaluate the non-"it's gold!" uses of gold and make a good guess of its floor value, what it'd be worth if people weren't hoarding it, and say something like "it might be 2-3x overpriced right now, but probably not more than 10x overpriced right now". So you can say, worst case, you probably won't lose more than half the money you put in gold, and almost certainly not all of it.

What is the floor price of Bitcoin, once you eliminate all speculation/hoarding?

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#184

Post by saalweachter »

mrb wrote: post #170
wpietri wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be working very hard not to understand their point. Or mine. The largest 500 retailers is an excellent representation of major retailers. It's also a reasonable indicator to use for general consumer behavior, because what makes retailers the largest is their use by consumers. You could claim that a loss of 2 retailers isn't significant proof of decline, although since it's 2 of 5, a 40% decline seems nota…

« isn't significant proof of decline, although since it's 2 of 5, a 40% decline seems notable to me » Any percentage value is irrelevant because a change of ±2 among 500 retailers is statistically insignificant. If it was ±20 it would be significant. What if we went from 1 to 2 accepting BTC, would you say "acceptance went up 50% among top 500 retailers?" It would be highly misleading and improper to report it as suc…

If they went from 1 to 2 accepting BTC, I would say "acceptance went up 100%".

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#185

Post by [deleted] »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #172
QAPereo wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re two words with different meanings, and I don’t find semantic arguments engaging, sorry.

Even though your whole contribution to this discussion was semantic. The definition of reasoning is: "the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way." As if evidence could not be a component of reasoning that leads one to logic and sense. The only reason why you don't want to engage this further is because you knew your quip was fruitless from the start.

[deleted]

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#186

Post by s17n »

Kelab wrote: post #87
s17n wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultimately a cryptocurrency needs a functional governance model to survive - it has to be possible to update the code, and so people have to decide somehow on which version is valid, and this creates the opportunity for a power structure to exist, and where there is such an opportunity, someone will fill it. Having a "hero" in charge is not the best way but Bitcoin is a fucking mess right now.

Heard of delegated proof of stake? The inventor moves on and the project is still alive and thriving No hero needed just honest nodes

Nodes will always be able to organize outside of the mechanisms provided by the code. Managing this phenomenon is what governance is all about.

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#187

Post by jmk2142 »

kbaker wrote: post #33
iopuy wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your general sentiment for sure, why should any of this matter? On a personal basis I feel much more secure knowing a respected member of the community has enough faith in their product to tie their identity to it. Litecoin also has features that bitcoin doesn't. Faster block generation time, different hashing algorithms, larger supply. Charlie gives me confidence that the leadership of Bitcoin has not.

The other question is, if LTC ever becomes as relevant as BTC is in the marketplace (BTC has 30x marketcap), could Charlie still retain enough power to continue to be the guiding hand? Gavin Andresen was that force in Bitcoin for years, as lead developer and chief evangelist, but now he plays a minor role; recently with big $$ in play and the big community split, not to mention the insane personal attacks, it is much…

I guess only time will tell. The thing I respect about Charlie is that he seems completely aware of the difference between being a guiding hand vs. totalitarian ruler with absolute power. He's mentioned numerous times that Litecoin is not "his" although people are free to ask him directly of his intention. Even in the little ways he articulates himself as the "benevolent dictator," as well as publicly speaking to the negatives that come with that is something that is refreshing. Not only does he have the right individual background to lead LTC to great things (whatever that actually ends up being), he has the right relations with people/stakeholders in different communities to make it happen as well.

Re: The Bitcoin Apocalypse Is Coming in Mid-November

#188

Post by wpietri »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #182
wpietri wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It surprises me to see this downvoted. One fundamental of investing is that stocks represent an economically productive asset. In contrast, commodities just sit there. If I buy a chunk of a company, that company is working to become a bigger, more effective, more value-generating company. If I buy an ounce of gold, it stays an ounce of gold. Index funds represent a broader bet still. Because they're composed of many…

I beg to differ with regards to your valuation of Bitcoin. It, like gold, has a practical use value. It, also like gold, has a value attributed to it due to it's rarity. However, Bitcoin has an advantage over gold, in that it can be traded without having to be transported _at cost_. This is why so many people are bullish on it. Oh, and so many people "who are in control of it" have too much of their own money investe…

Sorry, I missed this in all the noise.

Gold has use value in that even if the commodity speculation activity drops to zero, I can still turn the gold into jewelery and sell that. Or I could sell it to somebody who needs it for industrial purposes. Heck, I could sell it to the people who put gold leaf on candy.

Bitcoin has no such intrinsic floor. It only has exchange value. If people stop accepting it as a medium of exchange, you're left with bits. Bits are approximately free.

Post reply on HN