Topic: And the crash continues (Read 5363 times)

It's not shiny, and the sound when you throw a new coin onto the same address, is nothing like the sound of accumulating gold coins in a chest. Why would anywone want that?

And the wallet doesn't fit in my pocket, It's doomed.

Careful there, the IRS does not consider Bitcoin to be any kind of a currency for tax reporting purposes.  It's treated like capital.  Every time (and I mean every time) you convert a Bitcoin into another form (other cryptos, real estate, gold, dollars, even a cup of coffee), you are supposed to report this to the IRS.  Like I've said here before, the IRS has through their regulations made Bitcoin essentially impossible to use as a currency and still remain compliant with tax code.

The term 'currency' is thrown around very loosely.  The U.S. Government defines bitcoin as 'virtual currency,' which is very different than an actual currency. Why? Because real currency is backed by military...very expensive military forces...that can wipe out the entire world's population.   Bitcoin is backed by....anonymous neckbeards securing a blockchain.  There's a huge difference there.

If anything, I look at bitcoin as more of an 'alternate payment method,' no different than the categorization of credit cards, paypal, money orders, and the like.  Until bitcoin can shake it's direct value ties to the u.s. dollar, it cannot stand on its own and thus isn't a true currency.  It's basically exchangeable monopoly money on a harddrive.

They must have to switch between fiat currency trading to bitcoin trading very frequently because there have been long periods when bitcoins price was fairly stable interspersed with volatile periods.

i agree with NotLambchop and calci...

bitcoin trading have an high volatility...

more and more highest of fiat currency exchage!!!

but i know there are a lot of traders who switch from fiat currency trading to bitcoin trading,
just to take advantage from the highest market volatility!!!

all of us know if there aren't volatility,
there aren't gain in trading!!!

Well none of them are actually as volatile as the bitcoin. The volatility of rubble was actually a crash, and different from normal volatility.

It's a question of degree.
While USD price fluctuates, BTC price takes epileptic fits--often changing more in a few minutes than the USD does over a whole year.  That's why businesses which accept BTC set their prices in real money, and convert the price to BTC at the moment of transaction.

i don't understand if a Fiat coin it is not stable in real life,
why bitcoin should be???
i see euro, dollar, ruble, yen and all other coins are really volatile!!
and there aren't matters!!!

I doubt its value will ever be completely stable.

I wish to see a day when the bitcoin is free from manipulation and has a stable value.
I won't mind going all in on it then

I think that now, bitcoin has its own space!
and no one can remove it completely!!!
probably, new projects, can erode a bit 'of its market,
but bitcoin will never be abandoned....
and will never die!!
There are other projects that are promising but still have a lot to prove and demostrate!
I'm talking about Ethereum, Ripple, Nxt and why not Burst using the algorithm POC.

by the time everyone sees it, it will already be too late 

What underdog tho? tell me a project that realistically can make Bitcoin be in danger of being replaced.

If Bitcoin doesn't fear the underdog, it's gonna get burned real quick

Well, and then there was a dreammaterial by the name 'Unobtanium' ...  

I hope everyone is holding a few in their portfolio, just in case...
It deserves a close look.

In altcoin? No way. If for any reason bitcoin does fail, I don't think any of the alts are worthy enough to take the place of bitcoin. Even then my belief still holds true that one day bitcoin will be the currency that replaces fiat.

I should have said: "cryptocurrencies" are a century-long project, and the bitcoin inflation curve is well-adapted to that.  But in the end, there may be other cryptocurrencies taking a larger (or all) of the market share.

My belief is that cryptocurrencies/bitcoin will become true money if there is generalized merchant adoption, and that that is the true fundamental of bitcoin.  In other words, when bitcoin (or another cryptocurrency) is generally used to "pay for stuff".  Also when people will generally accept to be paid (salary etc...) into bitcoin/cryptocurrency.   The absolute price of bitcoin for that application doesn't really matter.  It would be the ease of going anywhere in the world, and be able to pay mostly anonymously, mostly anything.  Whether in an Eastern basaar, in a South-American shop, or in China or Japan.  Whether in Europe or in Africa.  Whether in the USA or anywhere else.  For big or small amounts.  No questions, no permissions, no bank agreements, small fees.  For world travelers.
Only after that, it really may become a long-term store of value, once it has a serious use as a currency.

Now, contrary to any technological evolution which can go very fast, people in general are very conservative concerning everything which touches their money.  Credit cards and stuff like that didn't change the fact that people were holding money on bank accounts.

The last time people really changed their money conceptually, was when they changed from metal to non-backed paper.  It took more than a century, with metal-backing, before that transition was generally accepted.  Changing from fiat to bitcoin/crypto is similar (but opposite) to the transition from gold/silver to non-backed paper.  I say, opposite, because the transition from gold/silver to paper was a transition from liberal-worldwide to state-based, and bitcoin/crypto would be a transition from state-based to liberal-worldwide.


This is very well possible.  However, bitcoin has the historical advantage and the "long blockchain-and-a-high-difficulty" advantage.  As confidence will build up very slowly in these matters, the longest history is often important.

That's a bit like gold/silver over other metals.  It is very well possible that other metals are more interesting, technically speaking.  Maybe iridium would be better.  But gold has the historical advantage, and no other technically improved metal has taken over from gold.

New cryptocurrencies will always be compared to bitcoin.  If bitcoin is volatile for more than 10 years, nobody will believe that a NEW coin will be less volatile for instance.

Merchant adoption will probably always include bitcoin if any other coin is also having success.

I mean, if bitcoin fails, I can hardly imagine any other coin obtaining more confidence.  What is possible is that bitcoin will grow slower than another coin, and that a few decades from now, another coin slowly has gained more confidence and competes bitcoin out of the market.  But if bitcoin fails before general adoption, I cannot imagine another coin "starting all over and winning more confidence".

I agree. I was only talking about the major downshifts though. The general downshift is caused by the inherent inflation and the lack of people buying Bitcoin.

Well yes, it's most certainly manipulation. That's been discussed at length in the past.
The problems however run much deeper than manipulation.