Gold down again. But so is Bitcoin.
silverbox, we need an update.
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 1385. (Read 2032272 times)
silverbox baaack in the red.
Gold not doing so well again. Bitcoin holding beautifully.
still can't get a hold of any GPL to short. silverbox, can i borrow your shares? 
in case you guys need BTC escrow service, I'm here
still can't get a hold of any GPL to short. silverbox, can i borrow your shares?
Due to the nascent nature of Bitcoin it will likely continue outperforming gold; assuming Bitcoin does not become completely worthless from some type of systemic collapse.
Even if Bitcoin were to drop to zero in terms of other currencies, it would not die - the very concept carries enough merit over existing systems to attribute value.
I'd have to search for what I wrote about this earlier, but the point boils down to this: the larger the system gets, the harder it is to adapt and make changes; if an exodus occurs, modifications are then possible which would allow the system to adjust and strengthen, competing better during a resurgence.
its called "routing around the problem".
Due to the nascent nature of Bitcoin it will likely continue outperforming gold; assuming Bitcoin does not become completely worthless from some type of systemic collapse.
Even if Bitcoin were to drop to zero in terms of other currencies, it would not die - the very concept carries enough merit over existing systems to attribute value.
I'd have to search for what I wrote about this earlier, but the point boils down to this: the larger the system gets, the harder it is to adapt and make changes; if an exodus occurs, modifications are then possible which would allow the system to adjust and strengthen, competing better during a resurgence.
But I agree BTC has the higher chance for gain, while PM's are safer.
Interestingly my brother, who has been reluctant to invest in either BTC nor metals up to recently told me today that he considered the metals to be pretty risky and started putting fiat into bitcoin three weeks ago. While being new to both kinds of "investment", he seems to feel more comfortable with bitcoin than with metals.
Welcome to the Age of the Internet!
Let me guess; he's probably 14 yo. 
He's in his 30s, has 2 kids.
About the tungsten being as bad as bitcoin somehow hacked: It's even worse: at least with bitcoin we would know, since all "coins" are accounted for. Also: the bitcoin you have can't suddenly turn out to be "fake". With gold, you just don't know until you try to sell to someone who is suspecting enough to check.
Why molecular; do I sense a preference for Bitcoin over gold? Omg!
I'm slowly breaking you all down!
I have always preferred bitcoin over gold
if it wasn't for bitcoin I'd probably have some tungsten filled gold...
thank you Satoshi
There really is a very simple solution for the tungsten problem if it concerns you, it doesn't concern me at all, tungsten is actually very difficult to form and work, because of its extremely high melting temp 6,192 Degrees F (I was melting some just last night in my oven in the kitchen!! ).
Buy Platinum, it has a higher density then W. If a Platinum coin passes a weight and volume measurement, its the real deal fo' su'e..
I do own Platinum about the same amount as my gold.
). Buy Platinum, it has a higher density then W. If a Platinum coin passes a weight and volume measurement, its the real deal fo' su'e..
I do own Platinum about the same amount as my gold.
But I agree BTC has the higher chance for gain, while PM's are safer.
Interestingly my brother, who has been reluctant to invest in either BTC nor metals up to recently told me today that he considered the metals to be pretty risky and started putting fiat into bitcoin three weeks ago. While being new to both kinds of "investment", he seems to feel more comfortable with bitcoin than with metals.
Welcome to the Age of the Internet!
Let me guess; he's probably 14 yo. He's in his 30s, has 2 kids.
About the tungsten being as bad as bitcoin somehow hacked: It's even worse: at least with bitcoin we would know, since all "coins" are accounted for. Also: the bitcoin you have can't suddenly turn out to be "fake". With gold, you just don't know until you try to sell to someone who is suspecting enough to check.
Why molecular; do I sense a preference for Bitcoin over gold? Omg!
I'm slowly breaking you all down!
I have always preferred bitcoin over gold
But I agree BTC has the higher chance for gain, while PM's are safer.
Interestingly my brother, who has been reluctant to invest in either BTC nor metals up to recently told me today that he considered the metals to be pretty risky and started putting fiat into bitcoin three weeks ago. While being new to both kinds of "investment", he seems to feel more comfortable with bitcoin than with metals.
Welcome to the Age of the Internet!
Let me guess; he's probably 14 yo. He's in his 30s, has 2 kids.
About the tungsten being as bad as bitcoin somehow hacked: It's even worse: at least with bitcoin we would know, since all "coins" are accounted for. Also: the bitcoin you have can't suddenly turn out to be "fake". With gold, you just don't know until you try to sell to someone who is suspecting enough to check.
Why molecular; do I sense a preference for Bitcoin over gold? Omg!
I'm slowly breaking you all down!
But I agree BTC has the higher chance for gain, while PM's are safer.
Interestingly my brother, who has been reluctant to invest in either BTC nor metals up to recently told me today that he considered the metals to be pretty risky and started putting fiat into bitcoin three weeks ago. While being new to both kinds of "investment", he seems to feel more comfortable with bitcoin than with metals.
Welcome to the Age of the Internet!
Let me guess; he's probably 14 yo. He's in his 30s, has 2 kids.
About the tungsten being as bad as bitcoin somehow hacked: It's even worse: at least with bitcoin we would know, since all "coins" are accounted for. Also: the bitcoin you have can't suddenly turn out to be "fake". With gold, you just don't know until you try to sell to someone who is suspecting enough to check.
modern day technology makes it feasible to "fill" a gold coin with tungsten
This simply highlights Bitcoin's superior efficiency as a monetary instrument due to lower costs. Of course, bitcoins can still be over or undervalued relative to its competitors based on its value proposition.
It has lower costs in terms of time because quantity and quality can be verified much more quickly than either gold or fiat currency. No drilling for assays and no special pens for detecting counterfeits.
It also has lower costs in terms of money and privacy; pseudo-anonymous, no transaction, storage, etc. fees. When currency controls get ratcheted up in 2014 this will become even more important with Bitcoin acting like invisible monetary glue.
Currently, the largest cost associated with using bitcoins in transactions is time. It is time educating the other party about why bitcoins are currency, safe, securing wallets, learning how to use the new technology, etc. The more of that which gets done the greater the network effects and the faster the time cost with using bitcoins declines.
As the great credit contraction continues those assets which provide safety (gold) and liquidity (bitcoins) will continue rising in value. Due to the nascent nature of Bitcoin it will likely continue outperforming gold; assuming Bitcoin does not become completely worthless from some type of systemic collapse.
Nice plug, but 2 BTC seems a bit high.
modern day technology makes it feasible to "fill" a gold coin with tungsten
This simply highlights Bitcoin's superior efficiency as a monetary instrument due to lower costs. Of course, bitcoins can still be over or undervalued relative to its competitors based on its value proposition.
It has lower costs in terms of time because quantity and quality can be verified much more quickly than either gold or fiat currency. No drilling for assays and no special pens for detecting counterfeits.
It also has lower costs in terms of money and privacy; pseudo-anonymous, no transaction, storage, etc. fees. When currency controls get ratcheted up in 2014 this will become even more important with Bitcoin acting like invisible monetary glue.
Currently, the largest cost associated with using bitcoins in transactions is time. It is time educating the other party about why bitcoins are currency, safe, securing wallets, learning how to use the new technology, etc. The more of that which gets done the greater the network effects and the faster the time cost with using bitcoins declines.
As the great credit contraction continues those assets which provide safety (gold) and liquidity (bitcoins) will continue rising in value. Due to the nascent nature of Bitcoin it will likely continue outperforming gold; assuming Bitcoin does not become completely worthless from some type of systemic collapse.
...
while The Tungsten Effect has the potential to put a cap on this bull run, i don't think it's devastating altho i could be wrong. money is about perception and confidence.
while The Tungsten Effect has the potential to put a cap on this bull run, i don't think it's devastating altho i could be wrong. money is about perception and confidence.
I cannot see your 'W Effect' being a huge deal though it could lop off the 'long tail' of the PM market which could be fairly significant in some scenarios and admittedly could seriously impact PM's role in low value exchange markets. That said, debasement is nothing which has not existed and been dealt with in the past when PM's were in widespread use as exchange currencies.
I see a pretty significant opportunity for entities combining the rolls of an escrow and quality assurance body for PM transfers, and using the 'lubricity' of Bitcoin to facilitate certain parts of the multi-way transaction in a reliable manner. I'm tied up at the moment but may expand on it later.
i think there is a difference this time which gold bugs may be underestimating. modern day technology makes it feasible to "fill" a gold coin with tungsten whereas this didn't exist in times past, at least significantly. this has the potential to introduce considerable doubt into small investors psyche as i now sit around tapping my few remaining coins on the counter listening for defects: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYmj-e621Ss
contrast this with the new modern money, Bitcoin. it's not possible to "fill" a Bitcoin. this puts the small petty tungsten thieves out of business and reduces the size of the potential attacker to that of a very large institution with the funds and motivation to destroy Bitcoin. the only ones i could see fitting into this category are banks and the gubmint. even then some say this is improbable, if not impossible...
...
while The Tungsten Effect has the potential to put a cap on this bull run, i don't think it's devastating altho i could be wrong. money is about perception and confidence.
while The Tungsten Effect has the potential to put a cap on this bull run, i don't think it's devastating altho i could be wrong. money is about perception and confidence.
I cannot see your 'W Effect' being a huge deal though it could lop off the 'long tail' of the PM market which could be fairly significant in some scenarios and admittedly could seriously impact PM's role in low value exchange markets. That said, debasement is nothing which has not existed and been dealt with in the past when PM's were in widespread use as exchange currencies.
I see a pretty significant opportunity for entities combining the rolls of an escrow and quality assurance body for PM transfers, and using the 'lubricity' of Bitcoin to facilitate certain parts of the multi-way transaction in a reliable manner. I'm tied up at the moment but may expand on it later.
I favor Bitcoin over gold and silver, but wouldn't be too quick to jump into a partially filled swimming pool just yet. I like my legs intact.
Or wade into the pool first and then do the hard work of wealth generation by stimulating transactional demand in competition to other payment systems like wire transfers, Visa, MC, Paypal, etc.
A $4B currency supply of bitcoins, which would support an economy about the size of Salt Lake City the 44th largest metro economy in the US with a GDP around $60B, translates into about $4,000 per bitcoin in 18-24 months (assuming a certain amount of 'destroyed' bitcoins).
Where else is there a start-up/VC opportunity the same risk-reward profile? Amazon could probably make more earnings buying up 3m bitcoins and then introducing it as a payment method than they make with their core business. Paypal contributes about 25% of Ebay's earnings.
as to silverbox's comment, i still don't like the Tungsten Effect. how many of you, seriously, can step forward and say that your bullion is pure? i know i can't for the coupla dozen coins i still own. the technology to fraudulently market bullion has escalated significantly.
All I can say is that yes, this form of fraud is real and a legitimate concern. Or at least if it is not currently, it will be under many of the potential scenarios which induce me to wish to own PMs.
By way of making lemonade out of lemons, I am tenatively planning to 'diversify' into obtaining whatever technology and skill set is required to assay metals to a higher than normal degree of precision. When I get around to it.
how is this not equivalent to a hack of the Bitcoin code?
That comment is a bit unclear to me. I guess you are saying something like: 'how is this not equivalent to Bitcoin having been cracked?' If so, I guess my answer would be that it's more equivalent to Bitcoin realizing a weakness that one should be careful to avoid. Pretty much everything suffers from such a thing actually.
unfortunately, it turns out my US is too low in energy to be practical for assaying bullion. so i'm still not sure of my own ounces.
i think the difference is that if the Bitcoin source code is found to be deficient in some manner or gubmints somehow develop the ability to penetrate SHA-256 before the devs can react, its totally over for Bitcoin. all of us will lose everything we've invested.
while The Tungsten Effect has the potential to put a cap on this bull run, i don't think it's devastating altho i could be wrong. money is about perception and confidence.
as to silverbox's comment, i still don't like the Tungsten Effect. how many of you, seriously, can step forward and say that your bullion is pure? i know i can't for the coupla dozen coins i still own. the technology to fraudulently market bullion has escalated significantly.
All I can say is that yes, this form of fraud is real and a legitimate concern. Or at least if it is not currently, it will be under many of the potential scenarios which induce me to wish to own PMs.
By way of making lemonade out of lemons, I am tenatively planning to 'diversify' into obtaining whatever technology and skill set is required to assay metals to a higher than normal degree of precision. When I get around to it.
how is this not equivalent to a hack of the Bitcoin code?
That comment is a bit unclear to me. I guess you are saying something like: 'how is this not equivalent to Bitcoin having been cracked?' If so, I guess my answer would be that it's more equivalent to Bitcoin realizing a weakness that one should be careful to avoid. Pretty much everything suffers from such a thing actually.
Jump to: