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

Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 368 posts

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#201

Post by pfisch »

jonknee wrote: post #165
seibelj wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh... you have to physically store those things? Easy to steal? Can't send to someone across the country instantly? Bitcoin is way better than gold or dollars when you are in an unstable country. People in Venezuela are huge crypto-heads for that reason

> Easy to steal? Bitcoin is perhaps the most commonly stolen store of value the world has ever seen. It has its advantages, but being difficult to steal (or lose permanently!) is not one of them.

Pretty sure cash is the most commonly stolen store of value in the world.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#202

Post by matt_wulfeck »

ericb wrote: post #170
vasilipupkin wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't people in Latin America just buy gold or dollars to store value ? I mean it's a circular argument. To say bitcoin is a store of value, there has to be an apriori reason why it has value. It can't be a store of value because it is. Right ?

It is like if you and I took turns paying for lunch periodically and we used a ledger to track who paid what, and who owes who. The ledger itself is bitcoin. The ledger paper is worthless, but the entries on it "have value." For you and I, the ledger "has value" because that's where the history is. If you printed 50 new blank ledgers, they wouldn't have value because they don't have the history and our mutual agreeme…

Except it takes usually 2 to 3 days for the ink to dry in the ledger, and costs you $3 every time you wrote in it, and consumed more electricity than your house does in a week, and you do it this way because you want it to be trustless.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#203

Post by andrewwharton »

copperx wrote: post #96
andrewwharton wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. We've been cruising past orders of magnitude ($0.10 > $1 > $10 > $100 > $1000 > $10000) and at any one of those jumps it seemed like the top of a bubble and just as likely to go in the opposite direction with the same velocity. Don't kick yourself for spending when you did, because as I'm sure you're aware, it's just as likely that you could be now saying "Thank goodness I u…

"I don't regret being a millionaire, and you shouldn't either."

You can't judge the quality of decisions you made in the past based on what you know now. Imagine going to a casino, putting $100 on red in the roulette wheel, black coming up and then thinking, "Man, I really regret putting it on red, I should have put it on black".

How is that in any way useful or going to improve future decisions? Bet on black, because you know, that's where the trend line is going?

Case in point: Do you short Bitcoin now or not? Who freaking knows...

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#204

Post by cwkoss »

amenghra wrote: post #200
cwkoss wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what reason do you think a stock exchange would want to add artificial delay to Bitcoin deposits? I could see holding a portion as 'pending' until many confirmations, or perhaps until the Bitcoin can be liquidated on the market, but both of those seem like they could still resolve an order of magnitude faster than the 'competition'.

The very same reasons they have delays right now. Institutions are able to move money pretty quickly and cheaply between themselves. The reason you don’t get that as an end user is because of compliance, fraud, etc.

I'd argue that Bitcoin would eliminate the fraud aspect (users can not 'fake' deposits), but compliance could certainly remain as an issue.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#205

Post by ChrisRazzzz »

heurist wrote: post #154
krrrh wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s see how everyone feels after the next correction. The headlines today seem to change every time I load google news. Up 10%, down 20%. There’s no way to know where it will go from here.

I had bought about $50 worth of BTC a year ago and it's now worth $800. Did the bitcoin economy grow that much in the last year? I've heard of increasing adoption by banks and governments but I don't know to what extent they're investing. I don't follow it closely and at this valuation, I have no idea whether it's a good investment or not. Should I sell it now before the inevitable crash? Should I buy more? I don't t…

Ask yourself first, why did the value climb 16x? If you cant answer that then I caution purchasing more. I would also spend some time understanding what "investing" is vs what speculating\gambling is.

This is gambling.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#206

Post by vasilipupkin »

ericb wrote: post #170
vasilipupkin wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't people in Latin America just buy gold or dollars to store value ? I mean it's a circular argument. To say bitcoin is a store of value, there has to be an apriori reason why it has value. It can't be a store of value because it is. Right ?

It is like if you and I took turns paying for lunch periodically and we used a ledger to track who paid what, and who owes who. The ledger itself is bitcoin. The ledger paper is worthless, but the entries on it "have value." For you and I, the ledger "has value" because that's where the history is. If you printed 50 new blank ledgers, they wouldn't have value because they don't have the history and our mutual agreeme…

ok, so I had an upsight, to borrow Neil Stephenson's terminology. Speficifcally, that POW coins are inherently flawed. There is no fundamental reason to own one of them.

POS coins on the other hand, are a different animal. If you own a POS coin, you get paid transaction fees for helping verify transactions. Thus, POS coins make fundamental sense, can be valued accordingly and create a reason to actually own the coin - and should, therefore, prove a better store of value than POW coins. Of course, POS is somewhat theoretical, but if Ethereum can pull it off, it should supersede bitcoin. Now, ELI5 why I am wrong, please.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#207

Post by Frogolocalypse »

xtian wrote: post #197
Frogolocalypse wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I move a rock from my left to my right does the rock weight more? It does to your left and your right. If I have a piece of paper with a one on it, and another one with a zero on it, and I exchange them. Do they weigh differently? Its a bit surprising that I'm being downvoted on a tech forum for asserting that information doesn't have weight.

> Its a bit surprising that I'm being downvoted on a tech forum for asserting that information doesn't have weight. You are being downvoted for espousing an erroneous definition of the word "physical".

I think the clarifications on what is physical were pretty clear. The information in a ledger isn't physical. The information stored in data isn't physical. It's information. Information isn't physical no matter what medium you choose to store it in.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#208

Post by wpietri »

sprafa wrote: post #123
wpietri wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is exactly what makes it a terrible store of value. As Wikipedia says, "The point of any store of value is risk management due to a stable demand for the underlying asset." Stable demand is definitely not a characteristic of Bitcoin.

one word: gold no reason it stores value outside of the fact that we all agree that it does, and we all accept it for curreny. Bitcoin is at that point. It's turning into digital gold. I agree with the original commenter. Looking at Bitcoin as a currency with terrible UX kept me from investing for the past years. Now it's going past inflection point - it's a store of value that will be acceptable everywhere soon.

You'd do better to spend a minute Googling before saying something so definitive. The use of gold for jewelry and industrial applications outweighs the investment use of it:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/274684/global-demand-for...

Gold has been valued from time immemorial for its unique aesthetic and practical properties entirely aside from its value as a currency.

That's clearly distinct from, say, paper dollars, which indeed have value only because we agree that they do (and because they're backed by the robust efforts of a government, of course).

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#209

Post by droffel »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #206
ericb wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is like if you and I took turns paying for lunch periodically and we used a ledger to track who paid what, and who owes who. The ledger itself is bitcoin. The ledger paper is worthless, but the entries on it "have value." For you and I, the ledger "has value" because that's where the history is. If you printed 50 new blank ledgers, they wouldn't have value because they don't have the history and our mutual agreeme…

ok, so I had an upsight, to borrow Neil Stephenson's terminology. Speficifcally, that POW coins are inherently flawed. There is no fundamental reason to own one of them. POS coins on the other hand, are a different animal. If you own a POS coin, you get paid transaction fees for helping verify transactions. Thus, POS coins make fundamental sense, can be valued accordingly and create a reason to actually own the coin…

Try this article from Paul Sztorc:

http://www.truthcoin.info/blog/pow-cheapest/

Definitely not ELI5 material though.

Re: Nasdaq Plans to Introduce Bitcoin Futures

#210

Post by hw »

vasilipupkin wrote: post #137
anonymous5133 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can get seized by the government. Any traditional assets or physical assets that is. Bitcoin and crypto is significantly harder to do that. You basically need to get the private key. IMO, this is the main reason that it is a a superior store of value compared to gold, dollars or traditional assets. If your government is corrupt then it is reasonable that the police will seize your gold. Not much of a store of valu…

Understood, but that doesn't explain why it's a store of value meaning why can't bitcoin cost 5k vs 10k

supply vs demand. More and more people are getting introduced to bitcoin, understanding it and buying into it. There's also a cap on the total number of bitcoins, so scarcity is another factor. Just like why gold is worth X instead of X/2
Post reply on HN