Investor swears bitcoin will ‘grind back’

[Deleted member 1333509]

Didnt understand the decentralised apps part of ethereum, how will it be seen by the general public then?

Yeah right now adoption is super low with dapps compared to normal web/mobile apps, because blockchain works well for specific things, but (at this point in time) not as a framework to build something on that will be making thousands of operations per second and continually transferring to data to and from the Ethereum blockchain.

The potential is huge though, but there haven't been any frameworks for quickly and easily building a dapp into a website or as a component of a normal app, like how there is react native or something like XCode for iOS apps, and that's restricted adoption as well.

CryptoKitties is probably the best example to date, which shows how much more progress is waiting for dapps. It's built right into a normal website accessible from a normal domain, but in the image you can see in the top left hand corner there is a message about connecting a crypto wallet in order to use the site - it connects something like Metamask to your account on the platform and then interacts between the dapp, your wallet and the Ethereum blockchain.

 

[TheVigilante]

Yeah right now adoption is super low with dapps compared to normal web/mobile apps, because blockchain works well for specific things, but (at this point in time) not as a framework to build something on that will be making thousands of operations per second and continually transferring to data to and from the Ethereum blockchain.

The potential is huge though, but there haven't been any frameworks for quickly and easily building a dapp into a website or as a component of a normal app, like how there is react native or something like XCode for iOS apps, and that's restricted adoption as well.

CryptoKitties is probably the best example to date, which shows how much more progress is waiting for dapps. It's built right into a normal website accessible from a normal domain, but in the image you can see in the top left hand corner there is a message about connecting a crypto wallet in order to use the site - it connects something like Metamask to your account on the platform and then interacts between the dapp, your wallet and the Ethereum blockchain.

https://ibb.co/ctwSph2

So the only way to access such sites is via a crypto wallet right?

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

So the only way to access such sites is via a crypto wallet right?

If it's a DApp that's built on Ethereum then I would imagine that there would be no way to access it without using an ETH wallet, as the purpose of the app would be either to use ETH/an ERC20 token as a payment mechanism (like Cryptokitties), tokenising intangible objects (also cryptokitties), or interacting with the Ethereum blockchain as a way of storing data in a decentralised way and executing smart contracts to manage the process of the app (like Augur - a prediction/betting DApp that's quite popular relatively speaking).

I honestly don't know enough about DApps to be able to say that the only way to access them is using a crypto wallet though, I'm sure there would be some work taking place to create DApps that work without the need for wallet access, because it could be a more fluid process of interaction, but I've never heard of one either.

 

[PatrickP92]

Coin example: numismatic value = $6. That is decided by supply and demand for that item, amongst other things. The value that someone would happily pay for a $6 collectable coin is of course also a store of value, as buying a house would be, because you reasonably expect to be able to sell the item for more at any future point, and the value that you hold in the asset is shared by others.

There are more than 6,000 publicly traded cryptocurrencies, and saying that they're only valuable as mediums of exchange shows that you don't really understand what you're talking about and need to do a bit more research into it.

Here's a simple example to consider - Ethereum is the world's second largest cryptocurrency, and is also an ecosystem that allows for decentralised apps to be produced - amongst a wide range of other things. This gives entrepreneurs value because they can create dapps that are easily shared to others. This is an example of Ethereum's "use value" as you're calling it, and provides another and more important way that users gain value from using Ethereum that is not just as a medium of exchange - ie creating businesses with it.

Nevermind the fact that Ethereum has been so successful as a facilitator for funding that the total dollar value of projects that were funded using the Ethereum network in 2017 was higher than the dollar value of all VC funding in the US during that year by a wide margin - with the largest ERC20 token to be funded in this way receiving more than $4Billion just on its own. Pretty damn significant considering the size of the VC market, and another example of Ethereum's use cases outside of being a medium of exchange.. let alone the other thousands of cryptos that each provide different forms of value.

These are the basic fundamentals of what you're trying to discuss and at a minimum you should understand what I've written above before continuing this conversation. Read over it a few times just to make sure, because you seem to be missing the scope of what cryptocurrencies are in 2020.

If you're going to talk about creating a new revolutionary adaptation of digital money, then you should focus more on understanding the actually types of digital money that are out there already, and less on what you're focusing on now. Whatever you think is important about the distinction between "use value" and "numismatic value", it's really not.

This averages out to a shocking 215 kilowatt-hours (KWh) of juice used by miners for each Bitcoin transaction (there are currently about 300,000 transactions per day).Nov 1, 2017
According to the EIA, in 2017, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential home customer was 10,399 kilowatt hours (kWh), an average of 867 kWh per month. That means the average household electricity consumption kWh per day is 28.9 kWh (867 kWh / 30 days).Apr 3, 2017

Blockchain requires way too much energy for my liking. Computers require a ton of power to fit a block into the ledger. How i see it is, there are over 300,000 transactions a day with bitcoin alone and each transaction requires about 8 houses running for 24 hours. 8 X 300,000 = 2,400,000 houses worth of electricity to sustain blockchain operations for a single day. That is such a huge waste, not just because of the power consumption but imagine if all those miners were to work on something useful instead of a ledger... The world cannot sustain something like this in a large enough scale, the system will fail. Also what about when bitcoins 21 million coin cap is reached? What would the incentive be to continue mining (maintaining the ledger). They still havent figured that one out. You can't make a system, and create your own rules for it out of thin air. This system is still a part of the universe and it must follow the laws of physics. This is why gold is stable as a money in economics, it is a product of the universe and it naturally abides to the laws of reality. Then people started creating their own rules with currency and wonder why the economy is collapsing. The coronavirus is not to blame. The spanish flu was way worse it killed 20-50 million people and infected 500 million people. Compare that to the coronavirus... The economy is the problem because people think they can make their own rules up, ultimately it doesnt work.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

Also what about when bitcoins 21 million coin cap is reached? What would the incentive be to continue mining (maintaining the ledger). They still havent figured that one out.

Fees FFS - they have figured that out, Satoshi figured it out over 10 years ago when Bitcoin was being invented.

When you make a BTC transaction you have to pay a fee - it goes to the miner that wins the next block in exchange for them processing your transaction and adding it to the Bitcoin blockchain. When 21M is reached miners will still be getting the fees for processing transactions although they won't be getting the block reward anymore. By then the value of the fees will be more than enough incentive.

I don't want to be rude and it's nice that you're taking an interest in this, but you haven't researched this AT ALL and you don't know what you're talking about OP.

This is basic stuff, not hard to research yourself instead of confidently stating things that are 150% wrong mate. Why the fuck would millions of people be investing money into Bitcoin including the leading commercial banks and hedge funds from around the world to the tune of billions of dollars if the system was so flawed that when it reached 21M BTC it would implode.

Instead of starting with wanting to shit on crypto to prove your point and then trying to bend reality to suit your agenda, do 2 minutes of research before claiming something instead to double check that what you're saying isn't wrong.

Also as a side note, you completely jumped onto a new topic (mining energy costs) instead of dealing with the original point you brought up and I refuted (there are no other uses for cryptos than mediums of exchange). Why not stick to one thing instead of reeling off a list of criticisms about crypto - I can only debunk one at a time mate.

 

[TheVigilante]

Fees FFS - they have figured that out, Satoshi figured it out over 10 years ago when Bitcoin was being invented.

When you make a BTC transaction you have to pay a fee - it goes to the miner that wins the next block. When 21M is reached miners will still be getting the fees for processing transactions although they won't be getting the block reward anymore. By then the value of the fees will be more than enough incentive.

I don't want to be rude and it's nice that you're taking an interest in this, but you haven't researched this AT ALL and you don't know what you're talking about OP.

This is basic stuff, not hard to research yourself instead of confidently stating things that are 150% wrong mate. Why the fuck would millions of people be investing money into Bitcoin including the leading commercial banks and hedge funds from around the world to the tune of billions of dollars if the system was so flawed that when it reached 21M BTC it would implode.

Instead of starting with wanting to shit on crypto to prove your point and then trying desperately to bend reality to suit your agenda, do 2 minutes of research before claiming something instead to double check that what you're saying isn't abject nonsense.

Also as a side note, you completely jumped onto a new topic (mining energy costs) instead of dealing with the original point you brought up and I refuted (there are no other uses for cryptos than mediums of exchange). Why not stick to one thing at a time instead of reeling off a list of criticisms about crypto - I can only debunk one at a time mate.

I am curious why is this Satoshi hiding or was it a pseudo name used?

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

I am curious why is this Satoshi hiding or was it a pseudo name used?

Satoshi Nakamoto was a pseudonym for sure. There's a lot of bullshit theories about who they are, it could be anyone - who knows. Someone it's definitely not is faketoshi Craig Wright.

If I created something I knew would do what Bitcoin has done, and I owned a huge % of it, I'd probably want to lay low as well. Easier to hide from the beginning than after the fact.

 

[PatrickP92]

Fees FFS - they have figured that out, Satoshi figured it out over 10 years ago when Bitcoin was being invented.

When you make a BTC transaction you have to pay a fee - it goes to the miner that wins the next block. When 21M is reached miners will still be getting the fees for processing transactions although they won't be getting the block reward anymore. By then the value of the fees will be more than enough incentive.

I don't want to be rude and it's nice that you're taking an interest in this, but you haven't researched this AT ALL and you don't know what you're talking about OP.

This is basic stuff, not hard to research yourself instead of confidently stating things that are 150% wrong mate. Why the fuck would millions of people be investing money into Bitcoin including the leading commercial banks and hedge funds from around the world to the tune of billions of dollars if the system was so flawed that when it reached 21M BTC it would implode.

Instead of starting with wanting to shit on crypto to prove your point and then trying desperately to bend reality to suit your agenda, do 2 minutes of research before claiming something instead to double check that what you're saying isn't abject nonsense.

Also as a side note, you completely jumped onto a new topic (mining energy costs) instead of dealing with the original point you brought up and I refuted (there are no other uses for cryptos than mediums of exchange). Why not stick to one thing instead of reeling off a list of criticisms about crypto - I can only debunk one at a time mate.

First of all the guy paying $6 for some silver that is only worth $3 will not get his other $3 back unless he finds someone else who will buy it for double the melt value. Presumably in the market he would only expect to get half back. No there is no garuntee that he would get his $6 back unless someone like him wants to pay more for numismatic value. Yes ive already read up on paying premiums for completing transactions after the 21 million coins but, thats just dilluting the coin and trying to improve its "value" by making it harder to aquire. Gold gets easier to obtain as time passes on, we learn better methods, we learn how to produce better equipment, this is how reality works. Ive based my entire project around making digital gold. Imagine 2 big corporations making a big transaction, why would they pay you to make this transaction for them and pay you a premium? Let's do a mind experiment. Its the year 2050, now the whole world is wasting ungodly amounts of electrical and computing power on making worthless transactions. Lets say 50% of the population so probably around 5 billion people are working to "make transactions" this is not producing anything of value. All these humans wasting time, energy, and resources to complete transactions is NOT productive to mankind. This is not a sustainable advancing productive future. You should not have to waste tons of energy whether it be electrical, physical, or mental to maintain an economy. Back to you NSYNC

Edit: By charging existing coins to process transactions you are just spreading them thinner and thinner across the increasing population trying to increase their value through scarcity. That would make it so that holding onto your bitcoin would actually increase its value. So not spending bitcoin actually increases its value in the long run... So by holding onto my coins and waiting a year or two I would be able to buy more stuff than i could with it today. Money should not function like that.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

First of all the guy paying $6 for some silver that is only worth $3 will not get his other $3 back unless he finds someone else who will buy it for double the melt value. Presumably in the market he would only expect to get half back. No there is no garuntee that he would get his $6 back unless someone like him wants to pay more for numismatic value.

Things are not the sum of the raw materials that comprise them. This is a super simple concept - it's why the value of a car is multiples more than the value of all of the raw materials that go into building a car.

It's like saying the raw materials of a car is about $5k, but the sale value from the dealership was $50k, but then when I want to resell it I could only get $5k for it at the value of the raw materials.. it's just a dumb argument.

Yes ive already read up on paying premiums for completing transactions after the 21 million coins but, thats just dilluting the coin and trying to improve its "value" by making it harder to aquire.

No there's no paying premiums after 21M, fees are a normal part of the function of the Bitcoin network that is happening right now and has always been happening.

The value of a single Bitcoin will be in excess of $10M each by the time 21M is reached, and the fees will be significant enough for miners to still invest their resources into securing the system. You're confusing the Bitcoin halving with this as well - that's the only way that supply is artificially constricted and it has nothing to do with fees.

Gold gets easier to obtain as time passes on, we learn better methods, we learn how to produce better equipment, this is how reality works. Ive based my entire project around making digital gold.

The concept of digital gold, how revolutionary. The first time someone actively tried to create "digital gold" was in the 90's.. I've heard more than 50 different projects repeat the same cut and paste line over the last 8 years.

If you create a currency that does the opposite of what Bitcoin does (ie. is inflationary) then you can expect all of the goodness that comes with that. If you're lucky you might avoid creating a digital version of the Bolivar.

Let's do a mind experiment. Its the year 2050, now the whole world is wasting ungodly amounts of electrical and computing power on making worthless transactions. Lets say 50% of the population so probably around 5 billion people are working to "make transactions" this is not producing anything of value.

50% of the population aren't needed to mine in order to support the network, in fact right now only 2% of users are miners, which is roughly 1M miners. That's like a 100th of 1% of the population of the world that is mining.

Also there are efforts to make mining less energy inefficient like using hydropower and geothermal in scandanavia - by 2045 I would imagine that all power consumed by mining will be renewably created, in fact not even 2045 - almost certainly by the end of the 20's.

All these humans wasting time, energy, and resources to complete transactions is NOT productive to mankind.

Agreed, proof of work isn't optimal. But it delivers net positives to the world. The total energy consumption each year is comparable to the consumption of Czech Republic - it's not ideal, but it's not the ecological disaster people people pain it to be.

You should not have to waste tons of energy whether it be electrical, physical, or mental to maintain an economy. Back to you NSYNC

Say what you want about crypto, but don't you ever bad mouth NSYNC - the Beetles of our era.

 

[Followlix]

The value of a single Bitcoin will be in excess of $10M each by the time 21M is reached, and the fees will be significant enough for miners to still invest their resources into securing the system.

Pardon me if I'm stupid and understood it wrong, but did you just say 1 BTC will cost $10M?

 

[rafark]

time to buy

Agreed. Everything is going down right now naturally because of all that's going on. When this is over everything will skyrocket again.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

Pardon me if I'm stupid and understood it wrong, but did you just say 1 BTC will cost $10M?

Sure I said 1BTC will be worth $10M by 2045, and obviously it's not saying that I could possibly know that for sure, but that it's my opinion.

The total value stored in Bitcoin is a fraction of the total value stored in the world's traditional markets, and there's been a 27,000,000% increase in the price of Bitcoin since 2011. It's not going to be another 27,000,000% increase over the next 10 years obviously, but there's still a significant amount of growth left - let alone another 25 years of price growth.

By the end of 2021 I think that Bitcoin will be at $100k give or take, and by 2024/2025 $1M. I agree with the stock-to-flow model used by Plan B.

The model is 99.5% accurate to the price history of Bitcoin so far.. ie. incredibly accurate and way beyond coincidence.

22k claps on Medium: https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25

Twitter: https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1168455920621412354?s=20

 

[Followlix]

Sure I said 1BTC will be worth $10M by 2045, and obviously it's not saying that I could possibly know that for sure, but that it's my opinion.

The total value stored in Bitcoin is a fraction of the total value stored in the world's traditional markets, and there's been a 27,000,000% increase in the price of Bitcoin since 2011. It's not going to be another 27,000,000% increase over the next 10 years obviously, but there's still a significant amount of growth left - let alone another 25 years of price growth.

By the end of 2021 I think that Bitcoin will be at $100k give or take, and by 2024/2025 $1M. I agree with the stock-to-flow model used by Plan B.

The model is 99.5% accurate to the price history of Bitcoin so far.. ie. incredibly accurate and way beyond coincidence.

22k claps on Medium: https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25

Twitter: https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1168455920621412354?s=20

With all due respect, this seems a bit delusional.

Even thought I'm in college studying Banks, Finances, and Stocks I still can't really understand the connection between all of these. (Maybe the fact that English is not my first language is a part of that)

Needless to say, I respect your vision / opinion and even thought I might not see the price of BTC going over $15k at max I really, really hope you or PlanB are right, haha.

 

[PatrickP92]

Things are not the sum of the raw materials that comprise them. This is a super simple concept - it's why the value of a car is multiples more than the value of all of the raw materials that go into building a car.


No there's no paying premiums after 21M, it's a normal part of the function of the Bitcoin network that is happening right now and has always been happening. The value of a single Bitcoin will be in excess of $10M each by the time 21M is reached, and the fees will be significant enough for miners to still invest their resources into securing the system. You're confusing the Bitcoin halving with this as well - that's the only way that supply is artificially constricted and it has nothing to do with fees.


The concept of digital gold, how revolutionary. The first time someone actively tried to create "digital gold" was in the 90's.. I've heard more than 50 different projects repeat the same cut and paste line over the last 8 years. If you create a currency that does the opposite of what Bitcoin does (ie. is inflationary) then you can expect all of the goodness that comes with that. If you're lucky you might avoid creating a digital version of the Bolivar.


50% of the population aren't needed to mine in order to support the network, in fact right now only 2% of users are miners, which is roughly 1M miners. That's like a 100th of 1% of the population of the world that is mining. Also there are efforts to make mining less energy inefficient like using hydropower and geothermal in scandanavia - by 2045 I would imagine that all power consumed by mining will be renewably created.


Agreed, proof of work isn't optimal. But it delivers net positives to the world. The total energy consumption each year is comparable to the consumption of Czech Republic - it's not ideal, but it's not the ecological disaster people people pain it to be.


Say what you want about crypto, but don't ever bad mouth NSYNC - the Beetles of our era.

The value of the car is determined by the materials, the value of the information required to assemble said car, and the energy it took to assemble said car. All 3 of these factors go into its overall value.

Yes, charging bitcoin to process bitcoin is a premium. You are paying a certain percentage for the amount that you want to process. So lets say there is a 1% premium on a 100 coin transaction, you are paying a premium of 1 bitcoin to use the system. There is no example in nature where a supply is constricted. Gold is not constricted and it worked as a great form of money for 5000 years and it still does. You have to transform your physical and mental energy into that gold. This is a built in proof of work system constrained by the laws of nature.

Actually I'm designing something better than gold. The only reason I use gold as an example is because it is a familiar form of money and it is constrained by the natural world. Gold has disadvantages like transportation, as well as its limited use value. You cant eat it, its rare so its not ideal to make clothes with or build a house with. You cant hire gold to do research for you. Not to mention the fact that gold is already being artificially created in a lab in Japan, the problem at this point is the technology is still in its infant stages so it requires alot of power and you only assemble a little bit at a time. As this technology advances we will be able to create gold easier than mining for it. So at that point in time, what is worth more, gold, or the information to cheaply, and effectively produce gold from lighter elements? I believe that the correct information is vastly more valuable than any material substance or object.

Roughly 2% of bitcoin users are miners? You trying to say that 98% of the bitcoin population are people just using them for transactions? Thats one of the problems for why it takes so long for a transaction to be completed. The other problem of course is that as the blockchain gets bigger it requires more work to fit it into the ledger. So as time goes on and the ledger gets bigger, its either going to take longer or you are going to need more miners.

So your saying we should waste our time, energy, and resources to build devices to sustain our economy?? That is a waste of energy when it can used to produce something productive. This is not net positive for the economy, this is wasting energy to make transactions when more optimal technology like hashgraph already exists that doesnt require ungodly amounts of time and energy to maintain a valid ledger.

Also NSYNC I'm not trying to bad mouth you, I'm trying to get you to understand the problems with these systems that must be fixed. You cant just ignore them and hope it doesnt come back to bite you in the ass. I followed cryptocurrencies up until the point that i realized how many flaws it has. We must rethink the entire system to fix these flaws, not design around the problems that arise because of it's design. I rather enjoy this debate personally, I think we can both learn from each other. As well as the curious people reading and learning. As I once said, I place very high value on information. My original idea was called the intelcoin, it placed value on human intelligence but, I quickly realized that true value is derived from new and useful information, not the spread of existing information. There is a coin that is already designed exactly like that, its called the Biocoin.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

With all due respect, this seems a bit delusional.

Even thought I'm in college studying Banks, Finances, and Stocks I still can't really understand the connection between all of these. (Maybe the fact that English is not my first language is a part of that)

Needless to say, I respect your vision / opinion and even thought I might not see the price of BTC going over $15k at max I really, really hope you or PlanB are right, haha.

Hey to be honest with you, who knows. It's easy saying that BTC will get to 10M, but we'll have to wait a while to see if it manifests. Just remember that a lot of people who owned tens of thousands of Bitcoins each have scoffed at people back in 2010 when the price of Bitcoin was less than 1c if you said that one day it would get to $19k.

Also bear in mind that if you own 1BTC now and it does get to 10M each by 2045 you have an astronomically low chance of not selling it along the way when it's worth a fraction of that it's human nature.

 

[PatrickP92]

Sure I said 1BTC will be worth $10M by 2045, and obviously it's not saying that I could possibly know that for sure, but that it's my opinion.

The total value stored in Bitcoin is a fraction of the total value stored in the world's traditional markets, and there's been a 27,000,000% increase in the price of Bitcoin since 2011. It's not going to be another 27,000,000% increase over the next 10 years obviously, but there's still a significant amount of growth left - let alone another 25 years of price growth.

By the end of 2021 I think that Bitcoin will be at $100k give or take, and by 2024/2025 $1M. I agree with the stock-to-flow model used by Plan B.

The model is 99.5% accurate to the price history of Bitcoin so far.. ie. incredibly accurate and way beyond coincidence.

22k claps on Medium: https://medium.com/@100trillionUSD/modeling-bitcoins-value-with-scarcity-91fa0fc03e25

Twitter: https://twitter.com/100trillionUSD/status/1168455920621412354?s=20

https://ibb.co/51rBXKT

When everyone believes in the same illusion, of course it is going to present itself as money. This chart represents a shape in nature called the Pareto Principle and this shape exists everywhere in nature. Go watch the Vsauce video on YouTube called the zipf mystery. This shape is not new, and it doesnt prove anything other than the bitcoin is becoming harder to obtain exponentially thus increasing its "value" exponentially.

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

The value of the car is determined by the materials, the value of the information required to assemble said car, and the energy it took to assemble said car. All 3 of these factors go into its overall value.

A producer wouldn't sell a car for the cost of production, so profit has to be factored into the value of the car as well of course. It becomes a part of the value of the car because by it being charge to the initial purchaser, it then is passed to other subsequent purchasers.

There is no example in nature where a supply is constricted.

If you mean that a conscious entity constricts the supply of nothing in nature, ok fair enough - it's hard to argue with something obviously true. But if you mean that there is no situation in nature where the supply of a resource is constricted, then why don't we all walk around with diamond encrusted teeth and an oil tanker of petrol parked in our back yard? Scarcity is everywhere in nature, I'm not sure what you meant by this.

Actually I'm designing something better than gold.

Gold is only gold because of the collective perception of its value. People think it's reliably valuable, so it is. That's the reason why the only way you could design something "better" than gold is to design a digital asset that people have more faith in than gold - which isn't likely tbh, but good luck.

I believe that the correct information is vastly more valuable than any material substance or object.

Agreed.

Roughly 2% of bitcoin users are miners? You trying to say that 98% of the bitcoin population are people just using them for transactions?

That's exactly what I'm saying. Roughly 50M Bitcoin users, roughly 1M Bitcoin miners.

Thats one of the problems for why it takes so long for a transaction to be completed.

That's not how mining works. More miners doesn't equal faster mining. Half the Bitcoin miners in the world could shut off today and it wouldn't mean that transactions started to take longer. The same volume of data per second is processed by the network irrespectively.

The other problem of course is that as the blockchain gets bigger it requires more work to fit it into the ledger. So as time goes on and the ledger gets bigger, its either going to take longer or you are going to need more miners.

No it doesn't, that's not how the Bitcoin blockchain (or any blockchain) works.

So your saying we should waste our time, energy, and resources to build devices to sustain our economy??

It's not a waste of time, energy or resources.

This is not net positive for the economy, this is wasting energy to make transactions when more optimal technology like hashgraph already exists that doesnt require ungodly amounts of time and energy to maintain a valid ledger.

When humans went from trading by taking 5 sheep to a market and swapping them for 12 chickens to using a standardised currency, the efficiency of trade led to huge levels of advancement throughout the world. It made us work more efficiently and led to the technological evolution of civilisation.

Bitcoin (and other cryptos) are not a waste of energy. They're providing a platform for an increase in the efficiency of how humans trade (again), and democratising the control that normal people have over their wealth. It's not a perfect system and has a long way to go, but it's certainly naive to say that it's a waste of energy.

Also NSYNC I'm not trying to bad mouth you, I'm trying to get you to understand the problems with these systems that must be fixed. You cant just ignore them and hope it doesnt come back to bite you in the ass.

Mate, there is very little that you could "get me to understand", and to be frank my little sister knows a lot more about cryptocurrency than you do and she's not trying to tell me that she's creating digital gold.

You don't understand the most basic aspects of blockchain or cryptocurrencies, and even though you think you can see the flaws in the system that everyone else is missing, I've met a lot of people like you and it's exactly the same with you as it is with them - you've read a few articles about crypto and think you've uncovered a ponzi-scheme, but you haven't because you need to understand why so many people are using crypto and why it matters that it's managed by algorithms.

Study blockchain properly then come back and tell me it's flaws. Code up a blockchain in C++ and then tell me what you need to get me to understand bud.

I followed cryptocurrencies up until the point that i realized how many flaws it has. We must rethink the entire system to fix these flaws, not design around the problems that arise because of it's design.

There are limitations to what can be achieved with blockchain, and also there are weaknesses of blockchain-based systems that aren't present with other data structures.

There aren't "flaws" with the technology as a whole though - if you mean proof of work wastes energy then join the back of the queue of people trying to make that more efficient.

I rather enjoy this debate personally, I think we can both learn from each other. As well as the curious people reading and learning. As I once said, I place very high value on information. My original idea was called the intelcoin, it placed value on human intelligence but, I quickly realized that true value is derived from new and useful information, not the spread of existing information. There is a coin that is already designed exactly like that, its called the Biocoin.

I don't mean this in a facetious way, but if I'm being honest I'm not learning anything from you because almost everything you're saying is based on assertions that are incorrect.

You're making claims about something that I've worked with for years and studied academically, and so while you saying these things to a random stranger probably makes you sound really smart, you're saying things to me that are not only easy to disprove, but could be researched using Google for 2 minutes on top of that.

How can you build a digital currency or whatever you're calling it without knowing the basics of how a blockchain functions? Even if you use a different structure you will need to know how you're going to implement what you're talking about implementing.

For what it's worth I do like your idea of tokenising newly discovered information and looked at something kind of related in the past. Do yourself a favour and spend a month watching blockchain development videos non-stop and really immerse yourself in how they actually work. You'll have a better chance of improving upon DLT structures if you actually understand them, because if you don't then you've got 0% chance of that happening.

 

[Mr.Sinatra]

Hey to be honest with you, who knows. It's easy saying that BTC will get to 10M, but we'll have to wait a while to see if it manifests. Just remember that a lot of people who owned tens of thousands of Bitcoins each have scoffed at people back in 2010 when the price of Bitcoin was less than 1c if you said that one day it would get to $19k.

Also bear in mind that if you own 1BTC now and it does get to 10M each by 2045 you have an astronomically low chance of not selling it along the way when it's worth a fraction of that it's human nature.

Dear friend,
Do you know what is the most exiting thing about Bitcoin ?
Volatility!

Nothing else.
The moment you own some crypto is just addicting you download an app and you put some fake money into it and you keep checking in on it every morning, up and down..
The volatility makes it exiting, forget the supply and all of that wuzzy wozzy.

Now you know what will be happening if your theory is correct ?
Nothing.

Crypto will be boring.

On a side note I did buy a lot of BTC at 4k and sold at 6.5k
Good luck to all the hodlers out there.
Cheers,

 

[Deleted member 1333509]

Dear friend,
Do you know what is the most exiting thing about Bitcoin ?
VOLATILITITY!

Nothing else.
The moment you own some crypto is just addicting you download an app and you put some fake money into it and you keep checking in on it every morning, up and down..
The volatility makes it exiting, forget the supply and all of that wuzzy wozzy.

Now you know what will be happening if your theory is correct ?
Nothing.

Crypto will be boring.

On a side note I did buy a lot of BTC at 4k and sold at 6.5k
Good luck to all the hodlers out there.
Cheers,

Good to know, and congrats on the ~50% ROI.

 

[PatrickP92]

A producer wouldn't sell a car for the cost of production, so profit has to be factored into the value of the car as well of course. It becomes a part of the value of the car because by it being charge to the initial purchaser, it then is passed to other subsequent purchasers.

If you mean that a conscious entity constricts the supply of nothing in nature, ok fair enough - it's hard to argue with something obviously true. But if you mean that there is no situation in nature where the supply of a resource is constricted, then why don't we all walk around with diamond encrusted teeth and an oil tanker of petrol parked in our back yard? Scarcity is everywhere in nature, I'm not sure what you meant by this.

Gold is only gold because of the collective perception of its value. People think it's reliably valuable, so it is. That's the reason why the only way you could design something "better" than gold is to design a digital asset that people have more faith in than gold - which isn't likely tbh, but good luck.


Agreed.


That's exactly what I'm saying. Roughly 50M Bitcoin users, roughly 1M Bitcoin miners.


That's not how mining works. More miners doesn't equal faster mining. Half the Bitcoin miners in the world could shut off today and it wouldn't mean that transactions started to take longer. The same volume of data per second is processed by the network irrespectively.


No it doesn't, that's not how the Bitcoin blockchain (or any blockchain) works.


It's not a waste of time, energy or resources.


When humans went from trading by taking 5 sheep to a market and swapping them for 12 chickens to using a standardised currency, the efficiency of trade led to huge levels of advancement throughout the world. It made us work more efficiently and led to the technological evolution of civilisation.

Bitcoin (and other cryptos) are not a waste of energy. They're providing a platform for an increase in the efficiency of how humans trade (again), and democratising the control that normal people have over their wealth. It's not a perfect system and has a long way to go, but it's certainly naive to say that it's a waste of energy.


Mate, there is very little that you could "get me to understand", and to be frank my little sister knows a lot more about cryptocurrency than you do and she's not trying to tell me that she's creating digital gold.

You don't understand the most basic aspects of blockchain or cryptocurrencies, and even though you think you can see the flaws in the system that everyone else is missing, I've met a lot of people like you and it's exactly the same with you as it is with them - you've read a few articles about crypto and think you've uncovered a ponzi-scheme, but you haven't because you need to understand why so many people are using crypto and why it matters that it's managed by algorithms.

Study blockchain properly then come back and tell me it's flaws. Code up a blockchain in C++ and then tell me what you need to get me to understand bud.


There are limitations to what can be achieved with blockchain, and also there are weaknesses of blockchain-based systems that aren't present with other data structures.

There aren't "flaws" with the technology as a whole though - if you mean proof of work wastes energy then join the back of the queue of people trying to make that more efficient.


I don't mean this in a facetious way, but if I'm being honest I'm not learning anything from you because almost everything you're saying is based on assertions that are incorrect.

You're making claims about something that I've worked with for years and studied academically, and so while you saying these things to a random stranger probably makes you sound really smart, you're saying things to me that are not only easy to disprove, but could be researched using Google for 2 minutes on top of that.

How can you build a digital currency or whatever you're calling it without knowing the basics of how a blockchain functions? Even if you use a different structure you will need to know how you're going to implement what you're talking about implementing.

For what it's worth I do like your idea of tokenising newly discovered information and looked at something kind of related in the past. Do yourself a favour and spend a month watching blockchain development videos non-stop and really immerse yourself in how they actually work. You'll have a better chance of improving upon DLT structures if you actually understand them, because if you don't then you've got 0% chance of that happening.

We make better diamonds for cheaper than they can be mined first of all, secondly on that, diamonds are only expensive because they artificially restrict the supply of natural diamonds. The windshields of jets are made from sapphires we grew to enormous size and then cut. Actually a couple days ago oil was $-40 a barrel so go fill your backyard and get paid for it bro... Things have always started as scarce but as time progresses we discover methods to make these resources easier to obtain. Take anti-matter for example, it was and still is a scarce resource but, as technology has advanced we have been able to obtain more using less power due to the information we collect and modify.

Yes you are correct, gold use to and still does maintain its high value due to perceptive belief but, in 1483 in gained real world use value in dentistry. Today it is used in electronic equipment and that is the only true value of gold at the moment. I dont count this illusion of value that people hold as true value. The perceived value that it holds is not derived from its value as a useful object. This perceived value is maintained by its rarity and the inability to "print" it. It is a natural proof of work system. Gold can lose its value overnight due to out technological advancement and because of its very, very limited use value. Gold and silver have been very good containers for your work energy and they still do but, we must lay down the sticks and stones and advance to a better system. By advance i mean make something better, as it currently stands, nothing fits that role. So we can agree that the real world use value of gold is minimal (especially with recent graphene advancements) but its use as a medium of exchange has high value, right? Then wouldnt it be safe to say that the medium of exchange value of a bitcoin is high but, the real world use value is lower than gold? That is what I aim to change personally. That would add true use value to the coin, the value of it could not be taken away. That has been the whole point of my statement. I do not want its value to remain based purely on faith...

And woah hang on a minute, you are trying to tell me that as the ledger gets bigger and bigger and you have to fit more blocks into it, it wont get harder? Ok lets start with the basics. Miners randomly create hex codes to randomly have a chance of creating a hex with every other transaction in the ledger plus the one your trying to fit into the ledger. As the ledger gets bigger and more complex, the chances of finding that specific hex code go down. If there are more miners, then there are more people randomly creating hex codes thus increasing the odds of finding the one with the ledger plus the new transaction. Im pretty I understand this concept very clearly... I do not need to go code anything lol my job is to make sure the physics and geometry work properly. Now if I have the mining process wrong please let me know and yes i will gladly go back and study more.