Topic: For Those Wondering Why The Current Rally - page 2. (Read 10143 times)

There is not plan of that detail that I'm aware of.  If you're so worried, make one.  That's how open source works.  We have a wiki and a mailing list.  Lay out a basic schedule and ask the bitcoin-dev list for feedback.

Rather then think that BTC is going to outcompete all these technologies with their advertising dollars I think you futurists should really ask yourselves what markets BTC offers a clear advantage in.

With international wire transfer fees at about $45 bucks (BOA), and currency conversion on top, BTC provides a clear advantage for small international business.  Small is where it really shines because its possible to hold foreign currency either by carrying a $1M balance in a swiss act or opening foreign bank accounts in the country whose currency you need to hold.  The BTC advantage is especially large if the business is international in both the supply and sales side.  For example, getting components made in China, adding some kind of value in Europe (even just a brand name), and then reselling to the USA.  The full money cycle in one supply cycle involves 2 currency conversions: USD->Euros (sale)  Euros->Yuan (rebuy inventory).  And of course if you are doing this via paypal, the full cycle is 2 paypal txns or 6% -- add currency conversion on top of that and I'll bet it pushes 10%!  That's a LOT of overhead compared to what BTC can offer.

Another niche is non-local purchases for people who do not qualify for debt-based instruments (i.e. paypal, credit card). 

It would probably take more than a decade to get that kind of penetration with bitcoin, and I think that's being overly optimistic.  Also, I expect by that time the bitcoin idea will have evolved a better system.

I consider myself an optimist concerning Bitcoin. But this is too optimistic even for me. You can't compare with Skype like that. It's pretty easy to create a Skype account, and most important, there's no commitment in doing so: you don't have to spend a penny.
Putting ~$700 on this "weird new technology" though, it's a whole different thing.

Never sell all.

Thats a noob misstake.

When you look back half year later and they are at $40 you will not be a happy man despite all your new money.

You will be happy if price tanks.
Take a profit and keep some, you will be happy in both cases.

I liked your idea so much I made a spreadsheet for it

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AknBnFOyxhcRdDBuczBWZTBaekY0N0d0cjR6X29kbEE

I guessed each user would keep maybe $100 in their wallet (very conservative).

Running a full node will eventually become specialized service/business.

Everyone else will be using light clients or online wallets.

Well, I see your point as currency markets are like the ocean and not the fish. But what percentage of cash balances do you think world population will keep in BTC? Why? What is your 'long term' horizon?

If Bitcoin had 663m users like Skype and if each user kept $700 in cash balances and it were 2016 with 15m bitcoins then that would result in $31,000 per bitcoin. And that does not factor in the bitcoins in circulation that have been destroyed (private keys lost, sent to unrecoverable addresses, etc.).

This isn't a good comparison because BitCoin isn't a single business, it is a monetary platform that can be used by all businesses. If the United States government had to run on the market cap of Skype, it would grind to a halt. The order that these things operate in are the Trillions, not billions.

I don't think that $15,000 per bitcoin will happen within the year (barring the outside chance of some hyperinflationary event), but it is easily attainable in the long term.

Well before we reach VISA levels, bitcoin will hit $100 a piece and there will be much more incentive to tackle the issue.  The closer we get to the scaling problems the more resources we will have to tackle them.  I'm not worried.

+1  I like that he called it "childish"...cause it really is.

Every full node. Only pool operators and solo miners need to be full nodes.

I think that's a too simplistic attitude. Bandwidth doesn't follow Moore's law; instead it often regresses to where many people now suffer severe bandwidth limitations, peering partners start arguing about money, and powerful companies fight network neutrality. Instead of sitting back and waiting for bandwidth to become ubiquitous and limitless, Bitcoin development must be focused on scaleability.

And we are all connected to the internet with one of these...
Once Bitcoin reaches VISA levels, the technology will be there - it is as easy as that.

Yeah, seriously. Each node must be able to handle 8Gbps if bitcoin ever operates at VISA levels. Even at the levels they speculate about optimizing it down to would be way above even what most companies can afford. Not that we will be going at VISA levels any time soon, but these issues may start to show way before that.

As of now, BTC can't rise much above $100, sustainably. The 1MB block size limit must be lifted first.

I am slightly sceptical about the scalability issues even in the long term. Storage space or IO throughput aren't even the most crucial limits, network bandwidth is going to be the first real bottleneck Bitcoin is going to hit.

Bitcoins are sterile assets just like gold but have less price support because they do not have industrial uses. As such any increase in the price of a bitcoin is simply a transfer of wealth from some other asset's value to holders of bitcoins. I like to view fiat currency as the common stock of issuing entities and value it accordingly. A similar approach may work for valuing bitcoins. Keep in mind that value and price are discrete.

If he is profitable when he sells he won. Doesn't matter that he didn;'t pick the absolute top.

And you'll regret it big time when it hits $100

I'm with you all in this one, but I tell you I will sell all $200,000 bitcoins when it hits $10