What is Bitcoin future?

I agree with the VHS vs Betamax example. I hear that VHS won out due to the availability of porn in that format. Apparently, a very large % of BTC is used on the Dark Web, thus we have an even more apt comparison with VHS ;-) I'm curious how lockdown will affect the price given a potential increase in demand for recreational substances ;-) So far, there have been a couple of recoveries from recent lows. I'm generally optimistic about the long term but it will be a yo-yo journey due to the activity of whales.
 
Advertise on BHW
VSYNC said:
Mass adoption can’t come from Bitcoin, no matter how much maximalists believe that it will. The instability of the price of Bitcoin is what has limited its use for anything other than speculation.. I’ve made and received a lot of payments in BTC, it doesn’t mean I would ever want my salary to be paid in it.

Stablecoins on the other hand are suitable as a bridge between the normal economic activities of the general population and the benefits of DLT assets.

Also stablecoins don’t permanently require to be pegged to fiat, and even today there are algorithmic, non-collatereralized stablecoins that aren’t dependent on holdings of USD etc

Bear in mind this is the earliest stage of stablecoin development, it’s only just starting to be explored.
Click to expand...

So you're excited for something like Libra?

Since you seem to be a stablecoin maximalist, can you give us an example of what your favorite(s) are?

Thanks.
 
Bitcoin Future is an automated trading platform backed by a group of venture capitalists used by traders to trade Bitcoins and other cryptocurrencies.
 
jasonforrest said:
So you're excited for something like Libra?

Since you seem to be a stablecoin maximalist, can you give us an example of what your favorite(s) are?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Libra is a joke and shouldn't even be called a cryptocurrency, because it's not. It's highly permissioned and about as centralised as a digital asset can be - I hate Facebook with a passion anyway, but Libra is what happens when people that have no interest in the tenets of cryptocurrency build "cryptocurrencies". Idiots. It's just a power/money grab, and anyone that understands blockchain can see it's bullshit. That's why they all started pulling out once they got advice from blockchain techs.

At this point in time, of the 3 types of stablecoins (that have been identified so far), fiat-collateralised stablecoins work well, but are incredibly centralised, incapable of scaling to the levels required for mainstream penetration and are vulnerable to the legacy financial system. Tether is the best example: they are storing billions of dollars in USD in banks. What happens if there's a breakdown of the mainstream financial system? What happens if their assets are seized as has happened to some of the funds from the exchange they also run, Bitfinex? A $6 billion marketcap seems big, but in comparison to the value of all cash money, stocks, etc etc in the world that are currently held in USD it's a tiny, tiny fraction - how can Tether scale to become a mainstream payment medium like a credit card without enormous amounts of USD being handed over to them and held in the banks mentioned above? It can't.

Overall the most promising type of stablecoin by far are algorithmic/non-collateralised stablecoins, and as well as being the most complicated to design, they're the ones that I think will spawn a digital currency that most of humanity will be using in 10 - 20 years. But they're going to take time to research and test.

For now onchain-collateralised stablecoins are the most promising. They are WAY less centralised than the likes of Tether, and also are more viable than algorithmic stablecoins at this point. MakerDAO was the best example, but even their system took a beating during the recent crash and allowed one guy to make millions in 5 minutes by buying a bunch of assets at a cost of $0 each. They obviously didn't plan for any event, and so now they've taken a huge hit.

It's early days anyway.. kind of like the internet just being created and then looking at all of the website available at that point in time and expecting websites to always be like that. Stablecoins have only been around since 2014, but you can be sure that they have a higher potential for becoming commonly used digital money than Bitcoin does at this point.

So answer your question directly though, I liked Basis but regulations got in the way of their project. They raised $133m in funding and had the most promising algorithmic concept to-date, but had to shut down and give it back to investors because of the mechanism they were using being considered a security by the SEC.

Right now I use Tether all the time, but if I had a different option other than other lesser-quality fiat-collat coins then I would use that instead, because I trust algorithms and math way more than I trust financial institutions and people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are discussing 2018 report here in 2020 ?
 
Btc seems to have a great future, it is convenient to keep savings now, the economy is unstable now, and bitcoin is only growing
 
No Great Furure for Bitcoin...Nor for anything...Everything will collapse sooner or later due to World War 3...
Invest in survival knowledge and stuff like that...Good luck...
 
What you think. Imagine a world with no new highways, no new roads, no police, and no education. That's what btc will do for ya.

Btw, this is old news, but I strongly doubt it'll equal $1MM.
 
We'll see, but all the forecasts say that it will be so.
 
Hey man, thanks for your in depth reply, i appreciate your opinion and all, another question, how do you feel about stablecoins possibly banned soon? They are all tied to a central entity, which means they can be stopped/screwed big time.

Another reason to realize how/why Bitcoin (BTC only) is such a great technology.


VSYNC said:
Libra is a joke and shouldn't even be called a cryptocurrency, because it's not. It's highly permissioned and about as centralised as a digital asset can be - I hate Facebook with a passion anyway, but Libra is what happens when people that have no interest in the tenets of cryptocurrency build "cryptocurrencies". Idiots. It's just a power/money grab, and anyone that understands blockchain can see it's bullshit. That's why they all started pulling out once they got advice from blockchain techs.

At this point in time, of the 3 types of stablecoins (that have been identified so far), fiat-collateralised stablecoins work well, but are incredibly centralised, incapable of scaling to the levels required for mainstream penetration and are vulnerable to the legacy financial system. Tether is the best example: they are storing billions of dollars in USD in banks. What happens if there's a breakdown of the mainstream financial system? What happens if their assets are seized as has happened to some of the funds from the exchange they also run, Bitfinex? A $6 billion marketcap seems big, but in comparison to the value of all cash money, stocks, etc etc in the world that are currently held in USD it's a tiny, tiny fraction - how can Tether scale to become a mainstream payment medium like a credit card without enormous amounts of USD being handed over to them and held in the banks mentioned above? It can't.

Overall the most promising type of stablecoin by far are algorithmic/non-collateralised stablecoins, and as well as being the most complicated to design, they're the ones that I think will spawn a digital currency that most of humanity will be using in 10 - 20 years. But they're going to take time to research and test.

For now onchain-collateralised stablecoins are the most promising. They are WAY less centralised than the likes of Tether, and also are more viable than algorithmic stablecoins at this point. MakerDAO was the best example, but even their system took a beating during the recent crash and allowed one guy to make millions in 5 minutes by buying a bunch of assets at a cost of $0 each. They obviously didn't plan for any event, and so now they've taken a huge hit.

It's early days anyway.. kind of like the internet just being created and then looking at all of the website available at that point in time and expecting websites to always be like that. Stablecoins have only been around since 2014, but you can be sure that they have a higher potential for becoming commonly used digital money than Bitcoin does at this point.

So answer your question directly though, I liked Basis but regulations got in the way of their project. They raised $133m in funding and had the most promising algorithmic concept to-date, but had to shut down and give it back to investors because of the mechanism they were using being considered a security by the SEC.

Right now I use Tether all the time, but if I had a different option other than other lesser-quality fiat-collat coins then I would use that instead, because I trust algorithms and math way more than I trust financial institutions and people.
Click to expand...
 
jasonforrest said:
Hey man, thanks for your in depth reply, i appreciate your opinion and all, another question, how do you feel about stablecoins possibly banned soon? They are all tied to a central entity, which means they can be stopped/screwed big time.

Another reason to realize how/why Bitcoin (BTC only) is such a great technology.
Click to expand...
Really nice question - bringing up what I think right now is the most important consideration in the world of crypto and blockchain, which 99% of people are not thinking about but should be.

The only successful implementations of stablecoins to date have been collateralised stablecoins - ie. Tether has USD as collateral, MakerDAO uses an ETH-based collateral system.

By their very nature, fiat-backed stablecoins are completely vulnerable to banning, unlike Bitcoin or 99% of other cryptocurrencies. A government can easily create laws to stop banks from being able to provide financial services to stablecoin operators and then where do they store their USD? They don't.

But, all stablecoins aren't collateralised.. super important point. It's just that non-collaterialised stablecoins (aka algorithmic stablecoins) are not easy to implement like Tether etc are, and so aren't prominently considered when people talk about stablecoins and their potential. It takes a huge amount of technical knowledge, like way past post-grad level computer science, math, economics all in one, to be able to design something like this that actually works and will still work in 20 years.

It's akin to creating Bitcoin again, but this time creating something bigger than Bitcoin (IMO). The reason is that Bitcoin's usecase is pretty expansive right now compared to where it started out, but in reality in the grand scheme of all human financial activity, it is very limited.


An algorithmic stablecoin would:

a) not be able to be shutdown and would be truly decentralised

b) very quickly gain multi-billion-dollar levels of adoption because of the complexity of creating one providing a "moat" for second movers, combined with the unparallelled scope of application for the asset.

c) would make those that created it wealthier than Jeff Bezos if they monetised it in the right way (probably even if they didn't).

d) would lead to true mainstream adoption, where many people are being paid in x stablecoin within the next few years.

e) would uproot the current financial system completely. That's the reason that central banks are focusing on stablecoins but they didn't so much with BTC - they're rightfully very worried about it, and know they need to get it under control because it's only a matter of time until the balance of power shifts away from them in a pretty significant way.


IMO, Bitcoin will never, ever be able to dislodge fiat currencies.. but a stablecoin that is distributed like Bitcoin, free or close to free to use, instantaneously transferred, has a clear and understandable mechanism for transitioning from USD-pegging to self-pegging when appropriate, and runs on an algorithm built well enough that no unexpected scenario could lead to a collapse in its value... that wouldn't only dislodge them, the volume of funds that would flood into that asset in a relatively short period of time would be absolutely unprecedented.

I think it would be bigger than the advent of Bitcoin, if that's possible to imagine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
VSYNC said:
Mass adoption can’t come from Bitcoin, no matter how much maximalists believe that it will. The instability of the price of Bitcoin is what has limited its use for anything other than speculation.. I’ve made and received a lot of payments in BTC, it doesn’t mean I would ever want my salary to be paid in it.

Stablecoins on the other hand are suitable as a bridge between the normal economic activities of the general population and the benefits of DLT assets.

Also stablecoins don’t permanently require to be pegged to fiat, and even today there are algorithmic, non-collatereralized stablecoins that aren’t dependent on holdings of USD etc

Bear in mind this is the earliest stage of stablecoin development, it’s only just starting to be explored.
Click to expand...

Disagree as well with you: Stablecoins are only collaterals to BTC or ETH which allows you to hedge them. Without crypto, I don't see any reason to use them as they would become totally useless.

I don't think BTC will one day become a real payment way as it's so slow and expensive compared to other crypto, like BCH for instance. But I'm sure it will remain a very good digital asset used as a financial tool.
 
Kilroy_01 said:
Disagree as well with you: Stablecoins are only collaterals to BTC or ETH which allows you to hedge them. Without crypto, I don't see any reason to use them as they would become totally useless.

I don't think BTC will one day become a real payment way as it's so slow and expensive compared to other crypto, like BCH for instance. But I'm sure it will remain a very good digital asset used as a financial tool.
Click to expand...
If you think the potential of stablecoins is only to act as sanctuary assets (not a hedge they're different things) for cryptos like BTC and ETH trading then we're starting from a place where you're missing the entire point.

The easiest type of stablecoin to create is obviously one where all you have to do is deposit USD/fiat and get a digital representation of that USD.. that's why they're prevalent right now.

Do some research into on-chain-collateralised stablecoins and algorithmic stablecoins and then you'll (hopefully) get that the potential for stablecoins is hundreds or thousands of times larger than the few billion dollars stored in them right now, but not while they are as centralised as Tether et al are today.

Your last sentence you said is a mute point because I totally agree with that.
 
umo98 said:
What is Bitcoin’s future?

Of course, only time will tell if these predictions are accurate. However, some central banks are quite pessimistic about Bitcoin. Because if the situation keeps going like this, Bitcoin will become a threat to the central banks’ existence. For example, in Bazel, Switzerland; International Payments Bank criticized Bitcoin heavily in their 2018 annual report. Among these criticisms were Bitcoin’s security issues and possibility of fraud. Despite this we can see that Bitcoin is a currency whose usage is increasing day after day. Moreover, Bitcoin keeps improving as a part of our lives with both benefits and downsides. People are providing demand despite the said security issues. This phenomenon can be seen as a reaction to the continuous intervention by central bank or government controlled currencies. After reviewing all of this process, the first question that comes to our mind is “Is Bitcoin a currency or a speculative entity? How can we describe it?”
Click to expand...


$10.000
Comming Soon ;)
 
The problem with it is that all the sites are so amateurish and can't be trusted.
The only way crypto can succeed in the mainstream is if a big body went in behind it...i.e the banks.
That said, let's see what happens when Amazon, Facebook and PayPal release their rumoured crypto efforts.
I suspect at that point things will finally take off big time.
 
I think that with him everything will be even very good. Halving soon.And then to the moon
 
In my opinion price will be between 5k - 15k for next 5 years and then will go up or will fall.
I didn't touch my btc. since 2013. and will stay like that until btc doesn't reach 100k :D
I think so that governments will put finger into bitcoin and try to "kill" him and give for us some crypto which they will control. Hopefully I'm wrong, but as I said this is my opinion and scenario which I see but before when that happened we will be able to make some nice profit :P
 
Cryptocurrency is the future, we like it or not.
The is no such thing as BTC guru as nobody, but nobody can predict what will happen with BTC.
If you make some research and don't play wild, you can make some good money tading BTC or other crypto.
See how BTC went this year: from 10 k to 3-4k to 10k again and now it's just moves around the 9k waiting for a decisive move.
It will go up to 20k? it will go down to 3k again?
there is no sure answer or algorithm, but one thing is sure: buy if it go low again as we are going to hear more about BTC next years.
 
Advertise on BHW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sign up now!

Main Menu

Home Main Forum List Black Hat SEO White Hat SEO BHW Newbie Guide Blogging Black Hat Tools Social Media Downloads

Marketplace

Account Selling Content / Copywriting EBooks / Methods Hosting Misc Proxies For Sale SEO - Link building SEO - Packages Social Media Social Media - Panels Web Design More

Making Money

Affiliate Programs Hire a Freelancer IM Journeys Making Money Pay Per Click Site Flipping Want to Buy

BlackHat World

Dispute Resolution Forum Suggestions & Feedback Introductions Lounge
Back
Top