Bitcoin: When Manias End

[patadeperro]

and I am a crypto fan, but I do think believe the prices are insane... and I am betting on monero BUT I agree there is a bubble.

 

[3hlut]

That article is FUD to create more sell pressure.The bear market is still on and we just hit $6500 perfectly to keep going down.

Bitcoin will fail as thats the plan however not now and not before it kicks some asses.Bitcoin will have new ATH's .Soon Nasdaq ,ETF,BAKKS etc .
They need a good entry point to join or else it makes no sense for them.
But in longrun Bitcoin is going to fail as it is not backed by anything at least this will the explanation of the fail and new governmental coins will be represented as solution.

Bitcoin is just the entrance for global blockchain and will lose its purpose once cryptocurrency gets really popular

But like i said first we will see new ATH's

 

[forethan]

As soon as we can order and pay in bitcoin in the dream market our favorite weed and with escrow mode then btc wil never die...

 

[jazzc]

So according with you comparing historical similarities is epistemologically insane?

When done to draw conclusions about the future, that's absolutely true. Nothing wrong with doing it near the fireplace with a bottle of whiskey.

so I guess from your perspective History is not a science,

History is very well a science. Predicting based on past data isn't History.

well I guess that all the history departments of the world did not know it,

Oh, they do know it, you're the one who's misunderstanding the study of history.

it may be epistemologically limitative BUT that does not make it wrong per se,

Just like astrology. The stars may tell you that stock X will rise and it just might do so - who knows, it might happen. The reason we're not using astrology for prediction is that its methodology is insane (i.e. not based on causality).

that is the framework he has decided to use

Yes. That's why he is laughable and cringe-worthy.

since there is no other way to study crashes,

Causality not good enough?

they are very difficult to replicate,

Now, this deserves a lengthier response. So, how do we study things that we can't replicate on a lab (like in social sciences)? Two ways - deduction from strong primitives and statistical tests. Note that by statistical testing we refer to specific robust methodology, not "oh look, a pattern" stuff. And then it's really really tricky to apply the statistical methodology right in non-trivial studies. But those are the ways that have to do with the scientific path when experimentation is out of the question.

His point was clear and it is that "some of the current cryptocurrencies will dissapear and there will be a consolidation (this has hapenned in many industries example the Internet, there were many search engines and today there are mainly 3)"

You could have provided other examples to disprove this but you did not.

Ah, I see why you were wondering. Yes, the reason I did not counter this is because I do not disagree that there will be some kind of consolidation. There are many cryptocurrencies and it is inevitable that some will fail. But that is in no way supporting his hypothesis, and that's what the context ("is this an argument for the hypothesis") that we were talking about.

You forgot to read the last part of my statement when I took into account all that :

"Even I understand the idea of "intrinsec value" may be a fallacy among commodities gold is the one that has been broadly accepted and the most valuable historically"
and he says there is no better alternative to fiat money than gold,

The key here is what is the criterion for "better".

If by better we mean "return on investment in 30 years", gold is sub-par stocks and bonds (depending on how you calculate "the stocks")
If by better we mean "return on investment in 15 years", gold beats the stocks (again, depending on what "the stocks" are in the calculation).
If by better we mean "I can buy fish after a nuclear war with it", gold is the winner, by far
If by better we mean "better to have on my portfolio than BTC for my retirement", I'll let you answer that for yourself

if you think that baseball cards is a better option then you will realize that when you compare the price of baseball cards with the price of gold he is right again, you could provide an example of any other commodity that has more value than gold but you failed to do it, furtheremore his points stands.

I did not say baseball cards were more valuable that gold, so not sure what you mean for the first part here.

For the second part, there's tons of commodities that have high prices. Houses, cars, ... bitcoin. But current value is of no sense (i.e. what should you compare a house with? An ounce of gold, a kilo of gold? A house made of gold?). What has sense is how each copes with FUTURE value. Is the future value of a house/car/btc/gold better than that of gold? And then how far in the future is future? 1 day (day traders), 1 year, 50 years?

 

[Hydius]

I honestly think that the only value of btc is being the father of crypto and that people recognice it, but as a currency its garbage, i like much more NANO as a currency wich i actually want tonuse and think it would be nice to use

In January I hopped on the huge Nano train that went on. What do you think about the lack of utilities of nano such as smart contracts though? Wouldn't that be more useful as a currency? To allow peers to build a digital platform on top of the currency

 

[jazzc]

In January I hopped on the huge Nano train that went on. What do you think about the lack of utilities of nano such as smart contracts though? Wouldn't that be more useful as a currency? To allow peers to build a digital platform on top of the currency

Have you seen any digital platform boom out of Eth's smart contracts? The demand just isn't there (yet?) compared to the classical solutions.

 

[TrueCrypt]

Have you seen any digital platform boom out of Eth's smart contracts? The demand just isn't there (yet?) compared to the classical solutions.

Bro, did you even cryptokitties? https://www.cryptokitties.co/
They were the sole reason at on particular point in time, for the eth network(miners) to make changes and adapt because it literally choked everything. txn confirmation times and cost skyrocketed due to the spike in popularity.... until everything went south..

Sorry to chime in with no contribution, jokes aside... great thread with note worthy contributions. thanks

 

[Redaline]

And you don't see the fallacies in that concept? I don't mean the immediate fallacies, I mean the implicated, deep, inherent to humanity flaws in the concept, rendering it totally useless (to say the least and not insult cryptoproponents awareness of reality straight on).

No, I don't. Each technology that is so deeply disruptive will eventually establish itself, either we like it or not (think BitTorrent). The benefits that it brings simply cannot be ignored.

 

[HowToBeHappy]

All money is essentially "Pokemon Go". Crypto, old school dollars whatever.

None of it is real because it is based on nothing of substance. Gold is locked away in the US vaults never to come out and is not big enough to back everyone's money. The Britsh Pound? Equated to one pound of gold once.

Now if you ask for your gold back from The USA you get invaded and deposed ... Gradafi, Sadam etc.

So, just because Bitcoin is a bit flimsy? It matter not.

As long as people honour it's value through services good etc ... Who cares?

Now, if they stop hooping it? That is a different story.

 

[Buzzika]

Interesting read:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4207096-bitcoin-manias-end

If you disagree with the article please explain why.

The whole article can be summed up to "I think bitcoin is dead". There is nothing else to it, no substance. So, there isn't even anything to argue against

"I know that, in theory, blockchain technology can be revolutionary as a way to facilitate transactions, but blockchain can be made to work without bitcoin. In fact, most people speculating in bitcoin today did not buy the cryptocurrency to use in a transaction but to profit from a continuation of its past meteoric rise."

This is a quote from the article, which explains my position very well.

I used to be that guy who would debate BTC/Crypto whenever someone said it was a fad or bubble. It wasnt at that time (or so I felt).

BTC was supposed to be a currency and that was it's value. Most people I see today are using it as an investment vehicle, which is not what it is. Hence, when people realize this sooner or later, the market will crash because it is not what they think it is.

I bought my first btc @ $13/coin but I never held BTC as an investment. Do I slightly regret my decision?
Yes and no.

Yes, because who doesn't like money especially without working for it.

No, because I still think that's a bad investment. BTC isn't something you invest in. Even if I made $$$ it would be like winning a lottery, and most lottery winners end up broke within a 5 year period. Now am already doing pretty bad in the regret/guilt department. Going from $$$$$$$ to broke would be too much for me. Wealth is a process not an event the way I see it.

Think of it this way, the people adopting bitcoin are supposedly on the bleeding edge of tech, they are the early adopters. Then why does old BTC still dominate when there are better crypto which can handle more transactions at lower fees? Wouldn't the early adopters be more willing to be early adopters of better tech, which is out there?

They would, but they are not the majority anymore. The majority is the investor. From the stupid average Joe who follows the herd, to the leeches in the banking industry who are milking it till its dead.

 

[Mrnewbie]

I can smell the fourth page coming..............................

 

[jazzc]

Bro, did you even cryptokitties? https://www.cryptokitties.co/
They were the sole reason at on particular point in time, for the eth network(miners) to make changes and adapt because it literally choked everything. txn confirmation times and cost skyrocketed due to the spike in popularity.... until everything went south..

That's a prime example of how low the demand for smart contracts is

From aaaaaaall those sectors that are supposed to be "disrupted"/"revolutionized"/><insert buzzword> by smart contracts ... card trading

 

[MAG WEB DESIGNS]

Gold is the same flawed concept as crypto except it has tradition working in it's favor and it has some physical applications irl. In the end we can as well come to digital currencies replacing fiats, it's just that it won't be remotely similar to the ridiculous concept btc or any other current day crypto currency proposes.

@Ponce Cuba said in another forum, you have to go to the way back machine cause he's apparently dead : "If you don't hold it you don't own it." Then again I wish I woulda bought BTC when it was 30.

 

[jazzc]

"Most people I see today are using it as an investment vehicle, which is not what it is.

If people are using it as such, then by definition - it is. Now, if you mean it's not a **good** investment, that's a different discussion.

Hence, when people realize this sooner or later, the market will crash because it is not what they think it is.

Since the production is limited, known and of a predictable rate, it can only go up as demand goes up. Compare this with (say) apples.

Suppose 100 people want to buy an apple and there are $100 apples at the price of $1.
Now, suppose next year there are 110 people wanting to buy apples. But there are 200 apples. The price of the apple goes down, despite the demand having increased by 10%.

Suppose now that 100 people want to buy a Bitcoin and there are 100 BTC at the price of $1.
Now, suppose next year there are 110 people wanting to buy a BTC. 80% of BTC is already mined by now, so the production can't just double, like with the apples. So now there are 105 BTC in the market. The price of BTC goes up.

That's how important the capped production is, when talking about BTC as investment.

Think of it this way, the people adopting bitcoin are supposedly on the bleeding edge of tech, they are the early adopters. Then why does old BTC still dominate when there are better crypto which can handle more transactions at lower fees? Wouldn't the early adopters be more willing to be early adopters of better tech, which is out there?

They would, but they are not the majority anymore. The majority is the investor. From the stupid average Joe who follows the herd, to the leeches in the banking industry who are milking it till its dead.

I think there is a misunderstanding. The way back original goal was to have digital gold. You don't buy stuff from the supermarket with gold. But you can have digital gold as an asset and use something else pegged to it to do your daily transactions.

 

[MAG WEB DESIGNS]

You're forgetting the "Final Value Fee". You don't hold it. What happens when a reset happens? Speaking philosophically here cause I know next to nothing about crypto's except the coinhive monero miner I played around with.

 

[Lukmat]

This is how I can summary whole crypto industry and if someone says it's "investing", he is an idiot.
Sorry to say that.

 

[AngelSeo]

If people are using it as such, then by definition - it is. Now, if you mean it's not a **good** investment, that's a different discussion.

This^^

This is how I can summary whole crypto industry and if someone says it's "investing", he is an idiot.
Sorry to say that.

High risk investment and gambling are quite different things. If you do not know what the difference is, then I am sorry for you.

 

[jazzc]

Don't start with personal insults if you don't want to listen to the new album of Hammerfall.

 

[Lukmat]

This^^



High risk investment and gambling are quite different things. If you do not know what the difference is, then I am sorry for you.

For me bitcoin and casino is no difference. If you get into casino in a day, when casino wants to give cash, you win. If you get into bitcoin, when charts going up, you win.
You cannot predict both, it's impossible for market like bitcoin to make any technical analysis. So it's not investment but pure gambling.

 

[Deleted member 813988]

For me bitcoin and casino is no difference. If you get into casino in a day, when casino wants to give cash, you win. If you get into bitcoin, when charts going up, you win.
You cannot predict both, it's impossible for market like bitcoin to make any technical analysis. So it's not investment but pure gambling.

+1
Its probably better chances to win in the casino, also easier and doesn't need any technical knowledge