Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bitcoin - ###Mod Note in 1st Post - Please Read###

1…1314151719

Comments

  • #482
    Bolderdash
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 50 ✭✭Bolderdash


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I'd imagine they'd just use the euro price as a base and charge you whatever the current exchange rate was when you paid with bitcoins.

    I support bitcoin for many reasons but above all because it's interest free and it's not debt based. When a new euro is created, debt is created with it which is worth more than the euro because of interest, leading to a perpetual cycle of more loans to pay off more interest. Bitcoin does not have this problem and therefore doesn't punish people who choose to save it.

    When a new euro is created debt is not created. The ECB simply prints more money. They don't owe more money when they print money.


  • #483
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Bitcoin was meant to be some kind of currency free of governments.

    At the moment it appears to be some method of gambling. People are buying it thinking they can get rich rather then use it as an actual currency.

    It has no intrinsic value beyond what people attribute to it. Once the majority realise this the bit coins will go into a cupboard with all the beanie babies that they expected to pay for their retirement.


  • #484
    Kylo Ren
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,366 ✭✭✭✭Kylo Ren


    Hobbes wrote: »
    It has no intrinsic value beyond what people attribute to it.

    So, like money?


  • #485
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,729 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Re the mod note in the OP, are there really people out there who are pathetic enough to sue Boards for taking bad advice from Boardsies?
    The site absolutely shouldn't be liable. Would I be liable for the behaviour of my tennants if I was a landlord?

    As BS as it is, I wouldn't be too surprised to see someone give it a go.


  • #486
    kingtiger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,744 ✭✭✭kingtiger


    Stages of a bubble

    Bitcoins journey so far


  • Advertisement
  • #487
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    srsly78 wrote: »
    People were buying lots of "stuff", but then the feds ruined everything.

    Oddly (or rather not oddly), BTC didn't crash when "the feds ruined everything". It wobbled and carried on. And when they did it a second time, it wobbled and carried on. It crashed when the first major legitimate use for BTC was suspended.
    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Ya - they are potentially useful, but after this I don't see how they can avoid speculative bubbles, without heavy regulation and some kind of centralized authority - and future bubbles like this, will just trigger more countries to crackdown like China just did, further reducing the relevance of cryptocurrencies that experience this.

    Regulation didn't prevent the entire world bubbling in 2007. Maybe the answer really is more regulation, or maybe it's less... or maybe the industry being regulated just doesn't need to exist anymore.
    Hobbes wrote: »
    It has no intrinsic value beyond what people attribute to it.

    The same can be said of any and all things that exist. I'm not sure what we mean when we talk about intrinsic value, because as far as I can tell all value is subjective and context based. If bitcoins existed in a world without the internet and the online economy, then they would be almost entirely valueless. They happen to exist in a context within which they are extremely useful. If that isn't intrinsic value, then maybe there's just no such thing.


  • #488
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 94,985 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    In the winter of 1928, Joe Kennedy decided to stop to have his shoes shined before he started his day's work at the office. When the boy finished, he offered Kennedy a stock tip: "Buy Hindenburg." Kennedy soon sold off his stocks, thinking:

    “”You know it's time to sell when shoeshine boys give you stock tips. This bull market is over."

    So bitcoin will be volatile until most people know what they are and how they behave. Only then will there be the correction. Only then can they be used as a medium of exchange rather than for speculation.

    Until then you can only win if someone else looses, and visa-versa.

    And as a medium of exchange there are any number of "coins"


    Like the music and film industry you have to wonder how many people would use their products if they were priced at a reasonable level. Things like spotify and netflix have gotten rid of a lot of peer to peer traffic once people could access the media at a fair price in a resonable timeframe.


    What would happen to bit coin if Western Union only charged 1% subject to a maximum charge of $5 per transaction ?

    Or what would happen if the rest of us could do currency transfers at the same prices that brokers and currency speculators get them for ??


  • #489
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    kingtiger wrote: »
    Stages of a bubble

    Bitcoins journey so far

    Isn't comparing graphs a bit of a correlation/causation fallacy?

    The underlying cause is what makes it a bubble (or not). It wasn't some credit or confidence domino effect that brought BTC down, but a reduction in it's usefulness as a currency. If you can't buy music on Baidu using BTC and suddenly they won't take BTC, you will sell your BTC for Yuan. I'm sure there's a speculative component to the exchange price of BTC, but it's not clear how big it is and the latest crashes only indicate how important use as a currency is to BTC holders.


  • #490
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    kingtiger wrote: »
    Stages of a bubble

    Bitcoins journey so far

    There are 2 problems with this comparison.

    1) There are two parts of bitcoins graph this year that look like the classic bubble chart. The first was back in April, and as you can see it never fully capitulated or reached the despair stage, so anyone who sold high and waited to buy back low now has no Bitcoins...

    2) ... and then November happened, and people pasted the bubble chart at $400, $500, $600, $1000, $1200. because it was parabolic upwards at each stage. It's hard to call the top, and now it's hard to call the bottom. have we already seen it? are we on the way back up or will it drop to $50? nobody knows, because the chart is useless other than saying that what goes up quickly will usually come down, at least temporarily.

    Anyway, as someone wise said, the price is the least interesting thing about Bitcoin, so here's some news that seems to have been buried among the panic - 25k location in Britain
    240k (!!) locations in Russia will be able to buy bitcoin in cash at lotto machines - http://www.cryptonews.biz/zipzap-adds-25k-locations-in-uk-and-240k-locations-in-russia-for-bitcoin-for-cash-beginning-jan-2014/

    Also, anyone looking for some comic relief, the coinion is hilarious.


  • #491
    xploderz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 128 ✭✭xploderz


    alb wrote: »
    Anyway, as someone wise said, the price is the least interesting thing about Bitcoin, so here's some news that seems to have been buried among the panic - 25k location in Britain
    240k (!!) locations in Russia will be able to buy bitcoin in cash at lotto machines - http://www.cryptonews.biz/zipzap-adds-25k-locations-in-uk-and-240k-locations-in-russia-for-bitcoin-for-cash-beginning-jan-2014/

    How does that make it any more useful as a currency? If it continues being so volatile, these machines will just be used by investors looking to make money from them.


  • Advertisement
  • #492
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Bolderdash wrote: »
    When a new euro is created debt is not created. The ECB simply prints more money. They don't owe more money when they print money.
    Something like 97% of all money, is actually created when banks make loans - creating Money:Debt at a 1:1 ratio, but the Debt carries interest, so grows greater than the total stock of money over time.

    That goes on, with Debt growing many multiples the size of Money (e.g. 1:20, 1:40), until the burden of the Debt and interest payments on it, become so great that an economic crash occurs, and economies get stuck in debt-deflation - until this is corrected by either (and keep the ratio Money:Debt in mind here):
    1: Creating Money without new Debt (this is almost never done), or
    2: Debt is reduced, through writedowns.

    In our economic crisis right now, we are in the 'debt-deflationary' stage of this, with way too much private debt, and a political deadlock preventing either of the above corrections from happening.


  • #493
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    xploderz wrote: »
    How does that make it any more useful as a currency? If it continues being so volatile, these machines will just be used by investors looking to make money from them.

    Because the only way Bitcoin can evolve as a stable currency is by much much bigger adoption than what we have now. As the number of users and distribution of coins increases, the effect that single news articles or single trades on an exchange have on the overall economy lessen. It means the value will have to go up a lot more, and it will be volatile during this growth, especially as quickly as the growth was this year.

    In the meantime it still has utility as a payment network, as a hedge against currencies that are debased by governments, as a speculative investment, and even as a hobby, this is why it is growing so fast despite not being an everyday currency (yet).

    Earlier this week I had dinner with friends, one of them paid the whole bill with credit card, I settled my portion with him with a Bitcoin transaction, from my phone wallet to his, it was neat. I'm keeping an eye on coinmap.org for businesses accepting Bitcoin in Ireland, I'd like to spend some locally.


  • #494
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    I support bitcoin for many reasons but above all because it's interest free and it's not debt based. When a new euro is created, debt is created with it which is worth more than the euro because of interest, leading to a perpetual cycle of more loans to pay off more interest. Bitcoin does not have this problem and therefore doesn't punish people who choose to save it.
    Bitcoins don't resolve this though: If Bitcoin survives long enough, it will become deflationary, which means the value of Bitcoin's will rise over time, and that increase in value will go disproportionately to people who have hoarded the most Bitcoins - it acts very similar to interest payments.

    If anyone goes into debt denominated in Bitcoins, it will have interest added on top of it, and will be even more burdensome than debt on current debt-based currencies.

    It's not unlikely for a large portion of the Bitcoin money supply to come under the control of a small number of people or a cartel, who set up banks and loan-out the remaining Bitcoin's - making a portion of Bitcoin debt-based.

    Since Bitcoin has a total money supply of about 21 million, the interest demanded on this Debt will definitely and irreparably become unsustainable over time, the only question is how long that would take.


  • #495
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    Hobbes wrote: »
    Bitcoin was meant to be some kind of currency free of governments.

    At the moment it appears to be some method of gambling. People are buying it thinking they can get rich rather then use it as an actual currency.

    It has no intrinsic value beyond what people attribute to it. Once the majority realise this the bit coins will go into a cupboard with all the beanie babies that they expected to pay for their retirement.
    The ironic thing now, is that mining of new Bitcoins is so out of affordable reach of the general user, that the practical survival of Bitcoin (arguably) depends on it being exchangeable for government fiat currencies - and now China has set the precedent of heavily restricting this - a precedent that is likely to be followed by other large economic regions, if Bitcoin enters into more speculative bubbles like we've just seen.

    So, the speculators are going to end up triggering the bubbles and ensuing reaction, which may end up killing Bitcoin.


  • #496
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Bitcoins don't resolve this though: If Bitcoin survives long enough, it will become deflationary, which means the value of Bitcoin's will rise over time, and that increase in value will go disproportionately to people who have hoarded the most Bitcoins - it acts very similar to interest payments.

    If anyone goes into debt denominated in Bitcoins, it will have interest added on top of it, and will be even more burdensome than debt on current debt-based currencies.

    It's not unlikely for a large portion of the Bitcoin money supply to come under the control of a small number of people or a cartel, who set up banks and loan-out the remaining Bitcoin's - making a portion of Bitcoin debt-based.

    Since Bitcoin has a total money supply of about 21 million, the interest demanded on this Debt will definitely and irreparably become unsustainable over time, the only question is how long that would take.

    Do we need a debt based society? or can we explore different options, crowd funded start-ups, savings that don't get debased over time by quantitative easing etc. A Pakistani friend has told me about Sharia banking, how interest on loans is against his religion! and that the only real money they value is gold as it requires no counter party trust. I had no idea about this, and it's on my list to read up about it next. I'm not ready to accept that our current financial ecosystem is good enough, so I'm really curious if Bitcoin as an experiment can perhaps help make it better, and I'm excited to see the outcome.


  • #497
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    Regulation didn't prevent the entire world bubbling in 2007. Maybe the answer really is more regulation, or maybe it's less... or maybe the industry being regulated just doesn't need to exist anymore.
    Indeed - because adequate regulation wasn't there. If you look at the US, the repeal of regulation kicked into overdrive starting in the 1980's (leading straight into the Savings & Loans crisis), and has only gotten worse since then.


  • #498
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    alb wrote: »
    Do we need a debt based society? or can we explore different options, crowd funded start-ups, savings that don't get debased over time by quantitative easing etc. A Pakistani friend has told me about Sharia banking, how interest on loans is against his religion! and that the only real money they value is gold as it requires no counter party trust. I had no idea about this, and it's on my list to read up about it next. I'm not ready to accept that our current financial ecosystem is good enough, so I'm really curious if Bitcoin as an experiment can perhaps help make it better, and I'm excited to see the outcome.
    I don't think we need a debt-based society, no - I don't personally like the idea of borrowed money carrying interest, and don't think it necessary.

    Apparently usury was one of the few things to make Jesus violent as well, heh:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Giotto_-_Scrovegni_-_-27-_-_Expulsion_of_the_Money-changers_from_the_Temple.jpg
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleansing_of_the_Temple

    The Sharia system is interesting alright, I've not looked at how that works before - it does seem to be some variety of gold standard alright.


    The problem I see, is that whoever controls the money supply (not even the creation of new money, but those who control most of the existing amount of money), can decide to lend it out and can transform a previously non-debt-based money supply, into a debt-based one (which would become unsustainable without creation of new Money, due to the interest on Debt).

    So you need some way of creating new money (either a central authority, or through 'mining'), that won't be able to come under the control of a small number of people (otherwise you have the problem of onerous debt that must be written-down/defaulted after an interval) - Bitcoin fails this, in my view (mining is now becoming concentrated), and I'm not sure how you could distribute mining in a way that can't come under the control of a small number of people like that - that would be the next challenge for cryptocurrency, perhaps (I don't know enough to say though).


  • #499
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    The deflationary aspect of Bitcoin is an interesting one. To have the block reward halving every 4 years is extreme, the decrease in supply could have been steadier. To have so many of the coins mined in the first few years is extreme also. The design of Bitcoin in general is so ingenious and every aspect seems to have been well calculated and intentional but I'm not certain about the intentions behind the deflation. It could be either for economic reasons that Satoshi thought this was a good thing, or he may not have liked the economic implications of it but felt it was necessary because it gives an incentive to people to be early adopters and to invest in mining asap. This aspect was essential for Bitcoin to gain adoption. It has no company behind it, no official advertising - initially it had to grow virally.

    One thing is for sure, the economic impact of the deflation may not make Bitcoin ideal in a scenario where it's the only currency that exists (a hypothetical scenario anyway), but it will not stop people buying it and encouraging it's growth, just as the lack of ability to control the supply of new gold does not prevent people wanting it as money.


  • #500
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    Bitcoins don't resolve this though: If Bitcoin survives long enough, it will become deflationary, which means the value of Bitcoin's will rise over time, and that increase in value will go disproportionately to people who have hoarded the most Bitcoins - it acts very similar to interest payments.

    If anyone goes into debt denominated in Bitcoins, it will have interest added on top of it, and will be even more burdensome than debt on current debt-based currencies.

    It's not unlikely for a large portion of the Bitcoin money supply to come under the control of a small number of people or a cartel, who set up banks and loan-out the remaining Bitcoin's - making a portion of Bitcoin debt-based.

    Since Bitcoin has a total money supply of about 21 million, the interest demanded on this Debt will definitely and irreparably become unsustainable over time, the only question is how long that would take.

    How will it be possible though, with the cap of 21 million? It literally isn't possible for there to be more owed than there is in existence, as is the case with all current major currencies.
    Bitcoin takes the power of money supply away from banks and governments because they do not control how often and how many new ones get created, and although I realize you believe government control of this is necessary for a currency, in my opinion every single government in history has abused this power to favour their mates at everyone else's expense (I would challenge anyone to find an example of one which did not) and therefore, while Bitcoin itself isn't perfect, what I admire about it is the concept of proving that all money needs to have value is for enough individuals to decide that it does. It is, potentially in my view, the beginning of the end for the current status quo, where we all live by systems spoonfed to us by government without actually questioning whether there's an easier and better way to do things.


  • #501
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    How will it be possible though, with the cap of 21 million? It literally isn't possible for there to be more owed than there is in existence, as is the case with all current major currencies.
    Bitcoin takes the power of money supply away from banks and governments because they do not control how often and how many new ones get created, and although I realize you believe government control of this is necessary for a currency, in my opinion every single government in history has abused this power to favour their mates at everyone else's expense (I would challenge anyone to find an example of one which did not) and therefore, while Bitcoin itself isn't perfect, what I admire about it is the concept of proving that all money needs to have value is for enough individuals to decide that it does. It is, potentially in my view, the beginning of the end for the current status quo, where we all live by systems spoonfed to us by government without actually questioning whether there's an easier and better way to do things.
    The only difference is:
    Fiat: If lent out by banks, has debt-attached as soon as it is created
    Bitcoin: Can have debt-attached later on, by people hoarding or gaining great control over part of the money supply (not even money creation - but of the existing supply), and lending it out.

    You can take non-debt-based Bitcoin, lend it out at interest, and it becomes debt-based Bitcoin - and the interest demanded can, over time (with enough Bitcoin becoming debt-based) end up exceeding the total amount of Bitcoin - which (with the 21 million BTC limit), can only end in writedowns/default :)

    Either way, that (particularly the interest payments) - if it happens - is going to guarantee excessive concentration of Bitcoin, in the hands of a few, over time (because onerous and ever-increasing interest payments on debt, will hoover up even more Bitcoins from the wider economy, into the hands of the creditors).


    The big (unsolved) question is: How do you create a currency, which doesn't allow the control of money (either creation or holding of money), to become concentrated in the hands of a few, over time?

    Bitcoin practically guarantees that (you already see it with large scale ASIC operations making mining unaffordable for most people), which is actually worse than fiat, because at least fiat has some level of accountability to a democratic system, Bitcoin won't even have that.


  • Advertisement
  • #502
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    KyussBishop wrote: »

    Bitcoin practically guarantees that (you already see it with large scale ASIC operations making mining unaffordable for most people), which is actually worse than fiat, because at least fiat has some level of accountability to a democratic system, Bitcoin won't even have that.

    I see where you're coming from but just two points, the Bitcoin the miners mine is of no value to them if they don't spend or sell it at some time. Many buying expensive mining equipment actually want to sell a lot of it as fast as possible to cover their overheads, many just see mining as way to get more fiat. I'm just saying that even relatively centralised mining, does not necessarily mean the mined coins do not eventually get a wide distribution. Again we could say the same for gold, people aren't pan-handling it from rivers so much anymore, it's big mining companies, but do they keep all the gold they mine? I've no numbers to verify the extent of aspect either way.

    Secondly there is no reason that there ever has to be a loan industry dealing in Bitcoin. It can suceed without this. Is there a loan industry in gold? What I like is that if there is a loan industry that failed in Bitcoin it would not be *too big to fail*. Letting the loan 'bank' fail would never prevent me accessing my own Bitcoin, never allow the gov to debase it, or prevent me from making a transaction. I could still get paid to my wallet. The money itself would exist and function outside of the banks.


  • #503
    KyussBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,797 ✭✭✭KyussBishop


    alb wrote: »
    I see where you're coming from but just two points, the Bitcoin the miners mine is of no value to them if they don't spend or sell it at some time. Many buying expensive mining equipment actually want to sell a lot of it as fast as possible to cover their overheads, many just see mining as way to get more fiat. I'm just saying that even relatively centralised mining, does not necessarily mean the mined coins do not eventually get a wide distribution. Again we could say the same for gold, people aren't pan-handling it from rivers so much anymore, it's big mining companies, but do they keep all the gold they mine? I've no numbers to verify the extent of aspect either way.

    Secondly there is no reason that there ever has to be a loan industry dealing in Bitcoin. It can suceed without this. Is there a loan industry in gold? What I like is that if there is a loan industry that failed in Bitcoin it would not be *too big to fail*. Letting the loan 'bank' fail would never prevent me accessing my own Bitcoin, never allow the gov to debase it, or prevent me from making a transaction. I could still get paid to my wallet. The money itself would exist and function outside of the banks.
    True, Bitcoins may not get loaned out like this - and ASIC miners I would agree are more likely to want to try and exchange Bitcoin for fiat - though more was pointing out how they've kind of put mining out of bounds of regular users, to a certain extent.

    My concerns that I describe here, more apply to Bitcoin long-term if it becomes a stable currency, and don't really apply at all to how it is now.

    In the past, during the gold standard, there was a loan industry in gold - and while gold today seems to be used as a pure 'store of value' (am not sure what gold miners tend to do today - whether they sell gold on or not), Bitcoin seems to be aiming more for use as a transactional currency built on real economic activity (or, if being more cynical, possibly as a purely speculative currency).

    Yes though, this doesn't mean Bitcoin are likely to get loaned out in the future; there may be a reason why it would, I'm not sure, so I'm more talking about a potential problem, rather than one which is real.
    That's an interesting thing to wonder about really: Would there be a reason, eventually, for people to start loaning out Bitcoin, and for people to start taking out Bitcoin loans? I'm not sure myself.


  • #504
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    KyussBishop wrote: »
    In the past, during the gold standard, there was a loan industry in gold - and while gold today seems to be used as a pure 'store of value' (am not sure what gold miners tend to do today - whether they sell gold on or not), Bitcoin seems to be aiming more for use as a transactional currency built on real economic activity (or, if being more cynical, possibly as a purely speculative currency).

    Yes though, this doesn't mean Bitcoin are likely to get loaned out in the future; there may be a reason why it would, I'm not sure, so I'm more talking about a potential problem, rather than one which is real.
    That's an interesting thing to wonder about really: Would there be a reason, eventually, for people to start loaning out Bitcoin, and for people to start taking out Bitcoin loans? I'm not sure myself.

    Bitcoin has no aims or agenda, the inventor may have had some, but it's in the wild now and Bitcoin will be used for whatever people decide to use it for and only changed for future purposes by consensus of the users. We'll find out in time how much of a loan industry, if any, emerges around it. https://www.coinlenders.com/ is the only current facility I know of, and I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole personally :)


  • #505
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    People keep bringing up the volatility issue. I found some analysis on it here http://news.coinometrics.com/measuring-bitcoin-volatility/

    The TLDR is EUR:USD has a daily volatility of approximately 0.35%. Bitcoin 4 years ago had an average daily volatility of 9%, it has been gradually decreasing and is currently 4.5%

    Bitcoin rose in value about 5000% in the last year, I think nearly everyone expects a significantly smaller percentage growth in the following year, which I guess will also lend to less volatility, but the trend from the link above would show it's a number of years away from being anything like as stable as our established currencies.


  • #506
    Hobbes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Keno wrote: »
    So, like money?

    I think Bitcoin would like to be a currency, but it isn't now.

    When I take €1 from the bank, it is a guarantee that whoever takes that €1 off me can take it back to the bank and exchange it for equal value, even if no one else will.

    Also if that bank has an issue paying that €1, it is insured against this (up to an extent).

    Bitcoin on the other hand, the person issuing the bit coin is under no obligation to ever honour that Bitcoin again. If their servers get hacked, or they run out of cash there is no guarantee in place that you will get your cash back. In fact they can close up shop and walk off with your cash and bit coins. They might not be able to sell the bit coins you own, but you wouldn't be able to use them unless you do the computer version of stuffing them under your mattress.

    It has no value when being released except the value in which you perceive it to be, while money does have a fixed value.

    Now if exchanges followed actual real world banking rules it might be a different story.


  • #507
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Hobbes wrote: »
    I think Bitcoin would like to be a currency, but it isn't now.

    A currency is something that is accepted as a medium of exchange by many people. Bitcoin is accepted by many people as a medium of exchange. Therefore Bitcoin is a currency.
    It has no value when being released except the value in which you perceive it to be, while money does have a fixed value.

    Money doesn't have a fixed value. It only has value if people are willing to accept it as a medium of exchange. Just like Bitcoin.


  • #508
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    A currency is something that is accepted as a medium of exchange by many people. Bitcoin is accepted by many people as a medium of exchange. Therefore Bitcoin is a currency.



    Money doesn't have a fixed value. It only has value if people are willing to accept it as a medium of exchange. Just like Bitcoin.

    Cigarettes are used as a medium of exchange by many people as well but we wouldn't call it a real currency. Bitcoin is closer to a bartering system.. You buy or create an asset and pay for something with it.


  • #509
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 94,985 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    http://rt.com/usa/bloomberg-anchor-robbed-bitcoin-747/
    Bloomberg TV provided viewers with an important lesson in digital currency when one of its anchors had a gift card stolen while showing it during a live broadcast.

    On Friday, December 20, Matt Miller surprised his two fellow anchors – Adam Johnson and Trish Regan – with bitcoin gift certificates during his “12 Days of Bitcoin” segment. Johnson then flashed his certificate on the screen for roughly 10 seconds - more than enough time for a Reddit user to scan the digital QR code with his phone and take the gift for himself.

    The user, who goes by the name “milywaymasta,” took to Reddit to explain what happened.

    “The guy that is hosting the series gave bitcoin gift certificates to the other two hosts. One of them opens up the certificate to reveal QR code of the private key,”     he wrote. "They then proceeded to show a closeup of the QR code in glorious HD for about 10 seconds. Hilarious."


  • #510
    Jonny7
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,696 ✭✭✭Jonny7


    Bitcoin is more of a speculative commodity than a currency

    Your mother isn't going to be using them to do the shopping for quite awhile - long after it's been regulated

    Most of it's use is ironically to make real money, aka greed


  • Advertisement
  • #511
    alb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,259 ✭✭✭alb


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    http://rt.com/usa/bloomberg-anchor-robbed-bitcoin-747/

    The guy who 'stole it' did it quickly so that no one else could steal it. He immediately offered to give it back, but in the end they agreed to donate it to charity (Sean's Outpost)

    The guy on bloomberg had no idea what he was doing, it was as if he was given a credit card for the first time and displayed the private details to the camera to show the public.

    Of course the difference between Bitcoin and a credit card in terms of security, is that if I pay with a credit card I have to trust that the merchant won't steal my private details, or have them stolen from them . With Bitcoin if I pay for something, the merchant never has to see or have access to my private key. You just have to put on your big boy pants and make sure you don't compromise your own private key, such as displaying it on TV as the bloomberg guy did :)


Advertisement