Topic: [2014-05-19] Winklevoss Bros: Bitcoin Will be Bigger than Facebook (Read 1387 times)

I for one hope they end up being right 

The heartbleed bug has not been around as long as bitcoin has.  If that specific example magically means all bugs can hide for exactly that long (which it clearly doesn't), then a malicious "bug" in bitcoin clearly wasn't planted by satoshi at this point.  Regardless, while this whole discussion has gotten pointless, your logic fails.

But you brought up SSL. SSL has been around a hell of a lot longer than Bitcoin and was still exploited. Not to mention there are millions more people that utilize SSL and have read over its code than Bitcoin.

IMO, Bitcoin will be bigger than facebook only if it becomes legalized worldwide

Cryptsy is a very small and relatively unknown exchange with limited geographical coverage. This will create enormous challenges to anyone who is seriously interested in using the altcoins.

I hope they're right, but I'm not so sure it will be bigger than facebook, but it has the potential for sure.

The benefit about the bitcoin-Protocoll is, that it is old enough to have a some degree of certainity that a big bug would already have been found.

In that case we might as well assume that Bitcoin is also bugged and is ready to be exploited at any moment by Satoshi. At the end of the day, there are no guarantees. Worrying about it, when there are people that can work to at least try to keep it from happening, is meaningless. There are far worse things to spend time worrying about.

Have you heard about heartbleed? That showed us, that code is not safe, just because it is open.
Now imagine some specialists, who really try to hide a backdoor. It is way easier to build in hidden backdoor camouflaged as a bug, than to find it.
If some years later somebody finds out about that backdoor, they just say "Sorry, it was a bug"

This is true, though I think Cryptsy is trying to bridge that gap. How successful it'll be is anyone's guess, and I'd still say that even with direct altcoin<->fiat conversions, they are still going to be tied to Bitcoin as it's the "go-to" currency.

Another point to remember here is that all these altcoins (perhaps with the exception of Litecoin and Namecoin) are exchanged for Bitcoin only. Alt-coin to fiat exchanges don't exist in most cases.

If a bit company launched an altcoin, we'd assume that the source would be released. Wouldn't this be enough to ensure that it's safe? I'm sure multiple people would fully evaluate the code and create safe versions (read: versions we trust, by trusted members of the community).

I don't think, that a cryptocurrency from a big international Company would have much success. The whole Point of cryptocurrency is to take Money out of the control of single entities. If a big Company launches an altcoin they might  put a backdoor somewhere in the code. I wouldn't trust them, and with all the NSA-stuff currently going on, I am for sure not the only one, who thinks so.

Here is my approach to crypto investing

I don't pile into one single anything, I prefer to diversify.

Accepting any alt for a merchant is no harder than accepting bitcoin with companies like coinpayments and moolah that make it easy to accept several different cryptos and convert them to fiat for a merchant on the fly. Merchants need fiat to pay their suppliers and employees.

Bitcoin is not a sure thing long term either if you think rationally.

Oh, Facebook already has their own money? I had no idea. Why would it need any crypto? Like I said the most likely approach for them is to issue their own tokens, which they already did, you say. Case closed.


Exactly. I don't follow Facebook and didn't know they already had their own tokens. They don't need crypto currencies to make maximum profit from their userbase. Crypto currencies wouldn't make any difference for them, bitcoin or alts.

Not only this, but why would Facebook even take it? They have their own form of money already. The only way they'd think about things like altcoins is if there is enough benefit to them. And then why not just launch their own altcoin?

Go pile into altcoins then ,hope you get lucky

The Bitcoin infrastructure is vital,as any coin being selected for any major adoption will require to have proven over time it's interactions,it's all about networking my friend. No alt will be selected by any merchant before Bitcoin  for those very reasons,too much negative risk and the savvy marketing guys know that. They aren't going for broke on the belief a shity alt will make them rich,they are after more use of their service and the more integration of other networks will bring them the rewards. That will make the the company profits,not a get rich scheme of buying up alt coins, You misunderstand how unprofessional that would be to a company like Facebook

Sure, the Price of the Chosen altcoin would go up in the short-term, but that doesn't say much about the Long-term. If the purpose of an altcoin is just to use it on Facebook, why would anybody use it? There is already Facebook-Money(I even saw giftcards in a grocery store, besides giftcards for Amazon)

Facebook users don't need much infrastructure. If the sole purpose of them using a crypto currency is to buy some Facebook services (I have no idea what those might be, I don't use it), then Facebook can set up its own fiat->crypto gateway. Of course Facebook would first buy that crypto cheap off exchanges and then sell at a premium to users. At least that's the most sensible business approach. Your calling altcoins 'shitcoins' doesn't achieve anything, except demonstrates your extreme bias. Objectivity is what successful investors have to possess not to lose money. And I am sure Facebook decision makers don't lack objectivity.

Oh, and most exchanges offer altcoins trading, I don't know if you've been living under a rock recently or what. I mean, altcoin trading is everywhere. But Facebook users wouldn't have to use any exchange to get the coins if Facebook went the crypto route. You see, big companies and people behind them are all after control and power. If they see an opportunity to control and exert power, they'll use it. They can't control Bitcoin, or, let me put it this way, controlling Bitcoin would require huge capital investments. Why all that hassle if Facebook can pay a little and achieve the same and make big dividends for their share holders in the process and quick buck for their own executives.

This is a huge part of why Bitcoin is going to be far ahead of the rest for the time being. The other way to look at it, though, is that any service that accepts Bitcoin could just as easily swap to any other coin since they are all essentially the same (in terms of transfers).