Will the Cryptocurrency drums go silent soon?
- Thread starter Redaline
- Start date
D
Deleted member 283687
Guest
that's the whole point where i want to mention,most people in this forum are Internet marketers not into real cryptocurrency,most of them here posts because they read something in the news or some blog or some friend told some story ,or people who spent couple of hours reading about crypto. ,its really worth enough to spend time to read about altcoins .bitcoin is the only crypto its just an early crypto
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
No disagreement here. But that doesn't answer the question of "if 1-6 wasn't enough to hamper it back then, why now?"
So, what I meant is that I don't understand what you claimed, I should have clarified that. What does "erase fiat" mean in your context?
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
So, 9 million?
The mainstream definition of a bubble is when something is traded at a price of which a significant part is due to speculation.
While I find that definition naive at best and can have fun arguing about it, this is irrelevant to how people use it. So, considering the crypto prices are largely driven by speculation, yes, people are legitimate at calling it a bubble. That doesn't mean it will pop just because it is one - it will not pop if demand keeps at a high level after speculation margins decrease significantly (in other words, when speculation capital goes away).
Invest in a mirror.
Now it has become a target for hampering because - it has drawn attention and money as the consequence of that. That's all.
My hypothesis goes like this...fiat money has been overprinted...you cannot simply "remove" it from the circulation, and some things like one country owning a large amount of debt of another is becoming increasingly irritating. Then, you invent means that will attract ordinary people's money into your invention and let it rise a bit. Sooner or later you will see large amount of fiat moved from "existence" into "currency" that is viable only because of its technological merits, nothing else.
When time comes (and I don't think personally it will come before BTC reaches 10-20 more in value), show that it is technologically flawed invention (double spending, viable SHA-256 attack which would enable you to always win a mining round) and the price will drop like a rock, while you either keep all the fiat or just remove it from the circulation. You can do that and undermine the whole system, or just push the agenda again with saying, yeah BTC failed, but look LTC is still alive and kicking.
This is all a theory and something that came to my attention. Hopefully it will never happen and we will see some interesting developments in the future.
AlumniAce
BANNED
- Jul 21, 2016
- 289
- 90
Crypto is the future. I was at an incubator in New York a few months ago and they had people working on blockchain tech. I have a 50+ year old professor of finance who said that blockchain is the future.
Most wallets and the mining codes are shitty indeed but you have to realize that we are still in the early adopter stage... crypto is not mainstream, but look at the growth this sector has seen over the years, right now 100 millions are being pumped in new projects and celebrities promoting crypto. Even billionaire investors who claimed it was a bubble (Mark Cuban) are now investing in it. Banks are investing, Big companies are in. I think that crypto will go mainstream in 2018 as it keeps getting more and more exposure. Then we might see a massive crash in 2019.
Most wallets and the mining codes are shitty indeed but you have to realize that we are still in the early adopter stage... crypto is not mainstream, but look at the growth this sector has seen over the years, right now 100 millions are being pumped in new projects and celebrities promoting crypto. Even billionaire investors who claimed it was a bubble (Mark Cuban) are now investing in it. Banks are investing, Big companies are in. I think that crypto will go mainstream in 2018 as it keeps getting more and more exposure. Then we might see a massive crash in 2019.
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
Fiat doesn't somehow disappear from existence when you buy crypto or oranges or houses or JrVIP subscriptions. It just changes ownership (he who had an orange, now has a buck - he who had a buck, now has an orange).
To reduce fiat in circulation all the central bank has to do is increase the loan interest rate. Curbing the future loans means less money out of the "printer", since old loans still need to be repaid (and they go back to the central bank as collateral from commercial banks).
* By fiat, I obviously include credit, since the actual printed money is less that 0.1% of the total currency in circulation.
We will almost agree soon...fiat doesn't change ownership per se, cash does. But cash is a special kind of money, that't way it is 4% more expensive at minimum compared to "computer-only" fiat that exists in computers. Now, you have given a good example with loans. Let's say you have 1000 USD outstanding loans and you have 2000 USD in circulation. In that situation money is cheap. However, if you coerce the other party to invest 1000 USD in some risky asset, and just delete the value of that asset, you now have only 1000 USD in existence for 1000 USD loan, and that gives you a right to charge premium. This is a big oversimplification, but I think I managed to get my point across.
jazzc
Elite Member
- Jan 27, 2009
- 2,964
- 14,717
The reason you can't see it is that you don't have a solid grasp at the basics. Fiat always refers to money. It's not a thing of its own. Cash is fiat money. Your bank account contains fiat money. Credit is fiat money. The difference between cash money and non-cash money is that the one is in physical format and the other isn't.
The core functionality of money is the exchange of value - and when that value is not about services (i.e. it's about goods) then you have a transfer of ownership.
When you order from Amazon, you pay without cash and you still get to be the owner of the item.
Cash is more expensive to print compared to changing bits and bytes on a computer. That has nothing to do with the above though.
Suppose the risky asset is tulips. When you pay a bazillion dollars for a bunch and then the price goes to zero, that bazillion dollars doesn't go poof into thin air. The only thing you can't do is use tulips as collateral for new loans. Which is not important because the total amount of money has remained the same and will inflate the price of some other asset that will be used as collateral. If the tulips were used as a collateral and then the value went to zero, the money in the market is still the same when the price tanks. What will happen then is that the loans will either a) default or b) the government will inflate the money supply to "bail out" the loans while reducing the value of the previously existing money.
In other words, you confuse the money quantity with the value of goods. The value of goods is NOT the same thing as the money.
The core functionality of money is the exchange of value - and when that value is not about services (i.e. it's about goods) then you have a transfer of ownership.
When you order from Amazon, you pay without cash and you still get to be the owner of the item.
Cash is more expensive to print compared to changing bits and bytes on a computer. That has nothing to do with the above though.
Suppose the risky asset is tulips. When you pay a bazillion dollars for a bunch and then the price goes to zero, that bazillion dollars doesn't go poof into thin air. The only thing you can't do is use tulips as collateral for new loans. Which is not important because the total amount of money has remained the same and will inflate the price of some other asset that will be used as collateral. If the tulips were used as a collateral and then the value went to zero, the money in the market is still the same when the price tanks. What will happen then is that the loans will either a) default or b) the government will inflate the money supply to "bail out" the loans while reducing the value of the previously existing money.
In other words, you confuse the money quantity with the value of goods. The value of goods is NOT the same thing as the money.
Last edited:
The amount is the number of particular monetary units in existence: more of it makes it less valuable and vice versa. The point of crypto kill switch is that you "kill the x amount of money" to make it more valuable, without resorting to other needs, such as buying back your debt or similar, which gives you a tremendous power. Lets leave it at that, since I cannot agree that you cannot remove the amount of money.