Just a badly-researched piece of bullshit I'm afraid.
/topic
Topic: How and why Bitcoin will plummet in price (Read 1966 times)
/topic
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative. 
? Krugman's criticisms are easily dismissed. Even a perma-bear like you must be intelligent enough to recognize the errors he made in his opus against Bitcoin. I don't have it in front of me, but I read his entire position awhile back and was surprised at how loose of a grasp he has on the basics of both economics and Bitcoin.
wait, when did electric become a perma-bear? seriously, you leave for a couple of months and all the oldfags become trolls?
You are missing a golden opportunity here, nobody can force you to think, only encourage it...
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative.
Professor Troll.
Edit:
Mind map.
Mucus <-> troll
Krugman <-> troll
Krugman <->mucus
QED, proof complete.
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative.
Professor Troll.
Edit:
Mind map.
Mucus <-> troll
Krugman <-> troll
Krugman <->mucus
QED, proof complete.
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative.
Professor Troll.
Edit:
Mind map.
Mucus <-> troll
Krugman <-> troll
Krugman <->mucus
Did you guys seriously waste your time reading an article which start like this?
They got the traffic and the backlinks needed. Next please..
Quote
[...]
Then you want some Bitcoin, let’s say to buy some drugs.
[bullshit, bullshit, more bullshit]
Then you want some Bitcoin, let’s say to buy some drugs.
[bullshit, bullshit, more bullshit]
They got the traffic and the backlinks needed. Next please..
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative.
? Krugman's criticisms are easily dismissed. Even a perma-bear like you must be intelligent enough to recognize the errors he made in his opus against Bitcoin. I don't have it in front of me, but I read his entire position awhile back and was surprised at how loose of a grasp he has on the basics of both economics and Bitcoin.
Krugman has been trolling Bitcoiners pretty consistently over the years, and it always was met with the same pre-conditioned response. He's become so good at it now that he can't even be ignored anymore... most appreciative.
http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-bitcoin-2013-12
After writing the post, Bitcoin supporters started flogging his inbox with "rage-filled missives," says Krugman in a follow up post.
He also said that the Bitcoin people have no sense of humor, and he suggested his "Bitcoin is Evil" headline was a "joke." In his defense, he really didn't write a post about why it was "evil," he just said he was skeptical that Bitcoin could work.
After writing the post, Bitcoin supporters started flogging his inbox with "rage-filled missives," says Krugman in a follow up post.
He also said that the Bitcoin people have no sense of humor, and he suggested his "Bitcoin is Evil" headline was a "joke." In his defense, he really didn't write a post about why it was "evil," he just said he was skeptical that Bitcoin could work.
I haven't read the article, but I can guess at what the author's point is.
the leading competitor coins, Litecoin and Peercoin (Yes, I know there are dozenS of these altcoins, but ltc and ppc ARE the leaders), have a LONG way to go to overtake Bitcoin in any way, shape or form. Will a new cryptocoin be invented that will revolutionize and become dominant in the near future? I think chances are slim and none, and slim just jumped off the bridge to his death.
the leading competitor coins, Litecoin and Peercoin (Yes, I know there are dozenS of these altcoins, but ltc and ppc ARE the leaders), have a LONG way to go to overtake Bitcoin in any way, shape or form. Will a new cryptocoin be invented that will revolutionize and become dominant in the near future? I think chances are slim and none, and slim just jumped off the bridge to his death.
Ripple employees currently: 25+
Bitcoin developers ~7-20 depending on where you draw the line.
It's already an uphill battle folks.
this person has no understanding of economics, and has his head up Keynes' ass.
that is all.
that is all.
Fascinating article, not for the content, (which is mostly incomprehensible by me) but for the illustration of the inherent problems of over-specialization.
While the author appears to be very knowledgeable in *some* field, (I assume some kind of monetary theory?) he is absolutely clueless when it comes to Bitcoin. He simply does not have the breadth of knowledge required to even imagine what Bitcoin is.
I don't pretend to completely understand every nuance or the mathematics or cryptography behind the Bitcoin protocol, but my varied level of understanding of various fields allows me to at least conceptualize what something like Bitcoin is.
In his article he seems to be basically trying to fit a square peg into a round hole because round holes are all he knows. Because of his narrow specialization in whatever field, he has never seen a square hole before, and when confronted with something outside his field of expertise (the square peg) he is unable to correctly process that information.
edit- this is not to say that specialization is not useful or necessary. Without people that were specialized in the fields of cryptography, mathematics, and internet protocols, Bitcoin would not exist. I'm just trying to say that someone who is specialized in plumbing and pipe-fitting should not try to perform cardiovascular surgery.
While the author appears to be very knowledgeable in *some* field, (I assume some kind of monetary theory?) he is absolutely clueless when it comes to Bitcoin. He simply does not have the breadth of knowledge required to even imagine what Bitcoin is.
I don't pretend to completely understand every nuance or the mathematics or cryptography behind the Bitcoin protocol, but my varied level of understanding of various fields allows me to at least conceptualize what something like Bitcoin is.
In his article he seems to be basically trying to fit a square peg into a round hole because round holes are all he knows. Because of his narrow specialization in whatever field, he has never seen a square hole before, and when confronted with something outside his field of expertise (the square peg) he is unable to correctly process that information.
edit- this is not to say that specialization is not useful or necessary. Without people that were specialized in the fields of cryptography, mathematics, and internet protocols, Bitcoin would not exist. I'm just trying to say that someone who is specialized in plumbing and pipe-fitting should not try to perform cardiovascular surgery.
I haven't read the article, but I can guess at what the author's point is.
the leading competitor coins, Litecoin and Peercoin (Yes, I know there are dozenS of these altcoins, but ltc and ppc ARE the leaders), have a LONG way to go to overtake Bitcoin in any way, shape or form. Will a new cryptocoin be invented that will revolutionize and become dominant in the near future? I think chances are slim and none, and slim just jumped off the bridge to his death.
the leading competitor coins, Litecoin and Peercoin (Yes, I know there are dozenS of these altcoins, but ltc and ppc ARE the leaders), have a LONG way to go to overtake Bitcoin in any way, shape or form. Will a new cryptocoin be invented that will revolutionize and become dominant in the near future? I think chances are slim and none, and slim just jumped off the bridge to his death.
Usually I attempt to admonish to some degree the regular circlejerk bitcoiners who reject an author's thesis outright if it has any kind of negative bend to it, but this write up just doesn't make sense. I can certainly picture a competitor cryptocurrency taking the crown from bitcoin at some point, but the idea that it would be introduced to the market at a rate of "$400" and people would instantly transition to it is a bit ridiculous. It almost seems that the author isn't even aware that there are already dozens of competitors.
This "expert" did his research so thoroughly that he wrote "BitCoin".
Many "experts" also said a few months ago that its nearly impossible that bitcoin would hit 1000$..
I rest my case
I rest my case
The writer has not understood that a coin does not have a fixed value. The user of the second coin would only be able to buy $450 worth of anything, the value of the first coin would remain at $500.
Just a badly-researched piece of bullshit I'm afraid.
"Note that the more “optimistic” you are about BitCoin, presumably you should also be more optimistic about its future competitors too."
I must say I have really noticed the Bitcoin bulls jumping up and down with excitement about all the altcoins that come out weekly.
Jump to: