Topic: Bitcoin isn't worth it for consumers. And that will stop adoption. - page 2. (Read 9891 times)
November 26, 2013, 07:29:09 PM
The merchants don't have to set prices in BTC. They do it in fiat, and BTC rate is applied at the moment of purchase. If I plan to spend $1000 this month, I just buy once 1 BTC from my monthly salary, and I can be sure that it will have at least that purchasing power (and probably more). Why leave it in fiat? Why not spend it, if I need to buy stuff anyway?
November 26, 2013, 04:29:37 PM
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising.
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
In the 19th century, during the golden standard, there was a constant deflation. So what? Why spend gold and silver, if you can buy more for them next year? Because you need to eat today!You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
That's OK while you can go out and earn more to pay for tomorrow, even if it will earn slightly less. But that's not where Bitcoin is, unless you invest a large $ (or BTC) in a ASIC which will be redundant in a couple of months. If you dont hold, you are paying increasing amounts to buy, if you hold you are compelled to hold longer to benefit from deflation making your asset worth more. This is an drawback that pro-deflation advocates ignore. Once it didn't matter because you could just mine more, I fear the shift to ASIC is actually counter productive.
November 26, 2013, 01:49:13 PM
Please quote all the discussion, not what part you want.
Gladly. I was responding to this initial thesis which you quoted yourself:Quote
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising.
Do you now agree or disagree? Will they use it despite deflation? 
November 26, 2013, 11:35:48 AM
I don't think that there are even 10 people with all their money in bitcoin.
It doesn't matter how much savings you hold in bitcoin. If you decide to limit your savings in BTC to 1% of all your fortune, fine. Now you can purchase a few more BTC for payments and then actually spend them.The argument was that nobody would spend bitcoins, because they go up in price. This argument contradicts to the idea of limited savings.
Please quote all the discussion , not what part you want.
You proposed a scenario:
"If bitcoin users have all their cash in BTC they will have to spend it some time."
I told you that is a SF one.
Nothing more nothing less.
November 26, 2013, 11:24:22 AM
I don't think that there are even 10 people with all their money in bitcoin.
It doesn't matter how much savings you hold in bitcoin. If you decide to limit your savings in BTC to 1% of all your fortune, fine. Now you can purchase a few more BTC for payments and then actually spend them.The argument was that nobody would spend bitcoins, because they go up in price. This argument contradicts to the idea of limited savings.
November 26, 2013, 08:03:57 AM
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising.
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
In the 19th century, during the golden standard, there was a constant deflation. So what? Why spend gold and silver, if you can buy more for them next year? Because you need to eat today!You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
Even now we have a deflation with a lot of things. Why buy a new smartphone now, if in 3 months it's gonna be much cheaper, and in 1 year it will fall to half its price?
If bitcoin users have all their cash in BTC they will have to spend it some time.
I don't think that there are even 10 people with all their money in bitcoin.
And , also many people advise against holding everything in btc.
November 26, 2013, 07:24:35 AM
Exit node does not know where the source node is. It's the chain of proxies. SR has fallen not because they outsmarted Tor
What degree of certainty do you ascribe to this assertion, my European friend?en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
November 26, 2013, 06:14:24 AM
Anonymity? Wait, Bitcoin doesn't have that.
How many f. times I have to mention Tor around? F. connect to it and all your anonimity problems are gone. Literally.
Incorrect.
Faster transactions? Wait, Bitcoin doesn't have that.
Not essentially the problem with this type of transactions...
November 26, 2013, 05:47:59 AM
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising. Why spend something now that might be worth 100x as much next year...
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
well you can, you just replace immediately what you spend, and your were going to spend that anyway, but I do take the point the cost purchase %. However its still cheaper for overseas transactions then interbank rate, or money exchangers
November 26, 2013, 05:28:43 AM
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising.
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
In the 19th century, during the golden standard, there was a constant deflation. So what? Why spend gold and silver, if you can buy more for them next year? Because you need to eat today!You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
Even now we have a deflation with a lot of things. Why buy a new smartphone now, if in 3 months it's gonna be much cheaper, and in 1 year it will fall to half its price?
If bitcoin users have all their cash in BTC they will have to spend it some time.
November 26, 2013, 05:03:17 AM
Nobody can be sure what the future holds. If we're lucky, they will skyrocket so high that we will be the richest forum ever to exist.
More greed talking here. Greed eats brains. Everyone is so obsessed with getting rich is giving me the biggest doubts about the future of BTC.
November 26, 2013, 03:31:12 AM
Nobody can be sure what the future holds. If we're lucky, they will skyrocket so high that we will be the richest forum ever to exist.
November 26, 2013, 02:58:55 AM
Plain wrong. IP address identifies a place on Earth, even not identity.
Ip address have nothing to do with bitcoin. There isn't a built in thing in bitcoin that logs your ip.
Don't be confused with the ip logs of blockchain.info. Those are the ip's of whoever relayed first the transaction to their node and afaict it is rarely the ip of the guy that actually did the transaction.
November 26, 2013, 02:43:15 AM
No one in their right mind is going to use BTC as a currency as long as they expect the value to keep rising. Why spend something now that might be worth 100x as much next year...
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
You know your cash will be worth less this time next year, thats the incentive to spend it.
November 26, 2013, 12:03:28 AM
Actually the chargebacks could be accomplished decentralized with Bitcoin's M of N signers capability.
What I find most pathetic about BTC is that making M of N transactions usable from the client and building a professional reliable group of escrow providers has been NOWHERE on anyone's radar, and they are so so needed.
IF real commerce was something that people cared about then we would see developers put effort their. But the most developed part of the BTC ecosystem are the Exchanges and the Speculation, that's all you really need to know to judge BTC.
November 25, 2013, 11:45:03 PM
"Those are problems for those businesses to solve, not problems with bitcoin itself. These difficulties are to be expected, but they do not make me any less confident in the ultimate success of bitcoin. "
November 25, 2013, 11:06:18 PM
November 25, 2013, 08:02:57 PM
Well, at least you would know the contents of everything that flows through those exitnodes. And I bet they do.
Still that has nothing to do with uncovering identities.
Quote
Ip addresses have nothing to do with it.
Plain wrong. IP address identifies a place on Earth, even not identity.
Nevertheless, it may tell them a lot of stuff on what it is you are doing, and maybe where you doing it. So, you'd have to be extremely cautious when using Tor. Not anything a wide audience will ever be able to safely use.
IPs are not about identity? My provider knows my IP address and will hand over name and address in the blink of an eye if asked by a court. It happens all the time with copyright infringements these days.
November 25, 2013, 02:43:25 PM
it could be that bitcoin won't be used wide spread for small purchases, but that doesn't mean it can't be a success in other areas.
November 25, 2013, 02:35:38 PM
vs cash/cards in person - too slow, I can pass someone banknotes in a shop and we are done in 5 seconds, I cannot wait 10mins to 2 hours for the BTC to pass
This is something that bothers me. How will it work when bitcoins are accepted everywhere? Will I go to Starbucks, pay and then wait 10 minutes before getting my coffee???
Exactly, I'd rather use MasterCard PayPass or Visa payWave.
If we have to install bitcoin acceptance machines at Starbucks, that's going to add to costs. People forget that and point to the fact that it is cheaper theoretically, but not practically. Add wifi, a terminal and the need to secure the machine and lost business due to people waiting in line for confirmations before they are allowed to leave. You can argue to use off-chain transactions, but why not use cards that are off-chain too? It defeats the purpose of bitcoin, it isn't even using bitcoin to be technically correct. You aren't transferring anything, you are just changing numbers on the screen like the card companies do when you buy something.
Actually Starbucks is probably a good counterpoint to what you're saying here, if you're okay with not accepting 100% of the customers. One, a lot of the customers would be accepted pretty easily by just installing an app on their smartphones. I know not everyone has smartphones, that's why I made the cavet above. Two, I don't know about all Starbucks, but my local Starbucks has free wifi already. That means that anyone with a laptop could also pay with bitcoin, regardless of whether or not they have a smartphone. And having been at Starbucks a lot lately, I can say that customers having a laptop or a smartphone would probably account for 90% of Starbucks' typical customers.
Sure, it's not as simple as whipping out a credit card to pay, but if they're okay with covering most of their existing customers, rather than all of them, Starbucks wouldn't need any bitcoin acceptance machines. It doesn't fix the having to wait 10 minutes problem, though. I suspect if bitcoin goes mainstream enough that retail companies are implementing it, some would make people wait the 10 minutes, and most would probably just accept the (relatively small) risk of a double spend.
Jump to: