Pages:
Author

Topic: Great time to buy (Read 8731 times)

hero member
Activity: 1372
Merit: 783
better everyday ♥
February 25, 2015, 11:39:53 AM
Still waiting for a more favorable entry level before I consider it a good buy. Do you expect it to decline a little bit before you buy or do you already consider this as a good buy?

Circle March 5th-6th on your calendar to see what happens to the price during the US Marshalls Silk Road Bitcoin auction:

http://newsbtc.com/2015/02/20/look-silk-road-auctions-impact-bitcoin-price/

If you see a price dump, BUY BUY BUY.

If you see a price pump, BUY BUY BUY.

Now at least you know what to do.   Cool
legendary
Activity: 3542
Merit: 1352
February 25, 2015, 11:28:01 AM
Still waiting for a more favorable entry level before I consider it a good buy. Do you expect it to decline a little bit before you buy or do you already consider this as a good buy?
sr. member
Activity: 303
Merit: 250
February 25, 2015, 11:20:05 AM
I think everyone should panic until i can buy btc back at $5, then we can have a repeat of 2013 with a more skewed bitcoin wealth distribution. come on guys, this will be fun

People lapping up coins in government auctions are also waiting for cheaper coins in the exchanges.
Once bitcoin falls to attractive levels, they will start accumulating.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1001
Crypto-News.net: News from Crypto World
February 25, 2015, 05:40:55 AM
I think everyone should panic until i can buy btc back at $5, then we can have a repeat of 2013 with a more skewed bitcoin wealth distribution. come on guys, this will be fun

ha this would be fun to see
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 256
February 21, 2015, 07:08:13 AM
I think everyone should panic until i can buy btc back at $5, then we can have a repeat of 2013 with a more skewed bitcoin wealth distribution. come on guys, this will be fun
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1031
February 20, 2015, 09:49:46 PM
Scientists recently proved they could produce gold using bacteria.  Gold will be less useful than bitcoin so yes, bitcoin is a good buy since gold will surely plummet. 
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
February 20, 2015, 09:32:00 PM
Now let see how many developers will develop with no incentives  Wink
What incentives are you talking about? I already said that the "bitcoin incentive to secure the network" is only in proof-of-work systems like the bitcoin blockchain.

What incentives?

Are you saying that an app developer only has an incentive to build applications on top of these technologies if he buys a coin and the coin appreciates in price? What are you saying?

Exactly. The same reason why Tim Draper is giving 300 BTC to each btc company he is investing on.
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 09:23:15 PM
Now let see how many developers will develop with no incentives  Wink
What incentives are you talking about? I already said that the "bitcoin incentive to secure the network" is only in proof-of-work systems like the bitcoin blockchain.

What incentives?

Are you saying that an app developer only has an incentive to build applications on top of these technologies if he buys a coin and the coin appreciates in price? What are you saying?
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 09:18:21 PM
#99
^Are you guys brainless zombies or something?

I just told you that the world might need distributed ledger technologies but not cryptocurrencies (and not distributed ledgers that NEED an overpriced high marketcap cryptocurrency like bitcoin in the bitcoin blockchain to secure the network), basically saying that cryptoCURRENCIES themselves don't have a future and you call me a "shitcoin pumper"?  Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1116
February 20, 2015, 09:13:25 PM
#98
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proo-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.

Ha I see. You are a shitcoin pumper.

Thing is, they all have a coins, they are all pointless and that's why nobody is developing on top of these.


Obvious Ripple shill is obvious.

legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
February 20, 2015, 08:53:29 PM
#97
^I suggest you read this enlightening paper:

http://www.oecd.org/daf/fin/financial-markets/The-Bitcoin-Question-2014.pdf



"THE BITCOIN QUESTION:
CURRENCY VERSUS TRUST-LESS TRANSFER
TECHNOLOGY"




Separating the useful (distributed ledger) from the useless (a cryptocurrency).

 Wink

Oh financial institutions that dislike a currency they don't control. How surprising! So enlightening!

Now let see how many developers will develop with no incentives  Wink
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 08:46:59 PM
#96
^I suggest you read this enlightening paper:

http://www.oecd.org/daf/fin/financial-markets/The-Bitcoin-Question-2014.pdf



"THE BITCOIN QUESTION:
CURRENCY VERSUS TRUST-LESS TRANSFER
TECHNOLOGY"




Separating the useful (distributed ledger) from the useless (a cryptocurrency).

 Wink
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 08:41:13 PM
#95
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proof-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.

Ha I see. You are a shitcoin pumper.

Thing is, they all have a coins, they are all pointless and that's why nobody is developing on top of these.

I just told you that the world might need distributed ledger technologies but not cryptocurrencies (and not distributed ledgers that NEED an overpriced high marketcap cryptocurrency like bitcoin in the bitcoin blockchain), basically saying that cryptoCURRENCIES themselves don't have a future and you call me a "shitcoin pumper"?  Cheesy

I don't know in what world you are living but the world is already moving toward cryptoCURRENCIES because they provide the incentives for developer to develop on top of them. A distributed ledger with no coins is a distributed ledger with no incentives that no one will care. Good luck with that.
Nobody will care about a distributed ledger where you can move any fiat currency or any asset and where you can build applications, smart contracts etc?

More like "nobody will care about cryptocurrencies themselves if you can move fiat currencies and any other asset using distributed ledger technology"  Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
February 20, 2015, 08:38:55 PM
#94
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proof-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.

Ha I see. You are a shitcoin pumper.

Thing is, they all have a coins, they are all pointless and that's why nobody is developing on top of these.

I just told you that the world might need distributed ledger technologies but not cryptocurrencies (and not distributed ledgers that NEED an overpriced high marketcap cryptocurrency like bitcoin in the bitcoin blockchain), basically saying that cryptoCURRENCIES themselves don't have a future and you call me a "shitcoin pumper"?  Cheesy

I don't know in what world you are living but the world is already moving toward cryptoCURRENCIES because they provide the incentives for developers to develop on top of them. A distributed ledger with no coins is a distributed ledger with no incentives that no one will care. Good luck with that.
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 08:29:12 PM
#93
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proof-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.

Ha I see. You are a shitcoin pumper.

Thing is, they all have a coins, they are all pointless and that's why nobody is developing on top of these.

I just told you that the world might need distributed ledger technologies but not cryptocurrencies (and not distributed ledgers that NEED an overpriced high marketcap cryptocurrency like bitcoin in the bitcoin blockchain to secure the network), basically saying that cryptoCURRENCIES themselves don't have a future and you call me a "shitcoin pumper"?  Cheesy
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
February 20, 2015, 08:26:53 PM
#92
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proo-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.

Ha I see. You are a shitcoin pumper.

Thing is, they all have a coins, they are all pointless and that's why nobody is developing on top of these.
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 08:11:05 PM
#91
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
Only in a system that uses proof-of-work (or a joke like proo-of-stake) like the bitcoin blockchain  Wink

but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.


The ripple consensus protocol for example doesn't need a high marketcap token as an incentive to secure the network. Hyperledger and others are doing the same thing. Others will follow.
legendary
Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000
--------------->¿?
February 20, 2015, 08:09:33 PM
#90
The world doesn't need a cryptocurrency, it might need distributed ledgers technologies, but a distributed ledger technology that makes sense doesn't necessarily need a cryptocurrency in order to work like in the bitcoin the currency-blockchain system.

You could use distributed ledger technologies in order to send fiat currencies internationally for almost zero fees (like the ripple network is trying to do, again, not ripple the coin, and again, ripple is just an example, hyperledger and others are trying to do similar things), use it for applications such as smart contracts and others. Basically for all the reasons you are saying bitcoin is great, bitcoin THE CURRENCY IS not only unnecessary, but it creates more problems than it tries to solve, such as irreversibility (0 consumer protection, a chimera any currency should avoid like the plague), slow transactions, higher fees in the future, volatility, scalability, and countless others. And overall, fiat currencies work just fine, a new volatile irreversible currency is not what is useful or needed.

That why I am using the "cryptocurrencies = pets.com" analogy and that's why I am taking tulips only for the chart comparison as an example of a bubble that bursted even tho the two don't share much fundamentals wise.

You do understand that the currency is the incentive for people to update and maintain that distributed ledger right?
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
February 20, 2015, 08:02:14 PM
#89
^ For someone that doesn't believe in the need for cryptocurrencies you sure do spend a HELL of a lot of time on a forum dedicated to them.  Cheesy

I know if I thought that low about something, I would spend all my time in a forum dedicated to it as well  Cheesy
full member
Activity: 462
Merit: 107
★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!
February 20, 2015, 06:28:52 PM
#88
^ For someone that doesn't believe in the need for cryptocurrencies you sure do spend a HELL of a lot of time on a forum dedicated to them.  Cheesy
What should the reason(s) be then? The classic "he spreads FUD cuz he wants to buy cheap coins"?  Undecided
Pages:
Jump to: