How fragile is the pot we're putting our money in?

HeRetiK

legendary

Activity: 3122

Merit: 2178

Playgram - The Telegram Casino

Quote from: zilions on July 13, 2017, 05:54:21 AM

I agree with a few other members here. We are past the "let's fight it" era and have entered the "we must create our own to compete" era.

In my eyes, the tech behind Bitcoin is not great compared to other newer currencies, but it has the reputation and dominance. And to me, that's enough to keep Bitcoin at the top of the crypto game for years (or decades) to come.

Exactly. Ultimately it's about how much trust you have in a cryptocurrency and trust takes stability and time. Bitcoin has survived a lot of crises in recent years, most alts still have to prove that they can prevail and are not yet-another-alt. BTC dominance is kinda hard to take serious as a metric if you see Ripple in third place.

zilions

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

I agree with a few other members here. We are past the "let's fight it" era and have entered the "we must create our own to compete" era.

In my eyes, the tech behind Bitcoin is not great compared to other newer currencies, but it has the reputation and dominance. And to me, that's enough to keep Bitcoin at the top of the crypto game for years (or decades) to come.

classicsucks

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 504

Quote from: Torque on July 12, 2017, 07:38:36 PM

The PBOC surely knows that China currently has a lock on Bitcoin mining, yet they do nothing to subvert it. I would think that further centralization of mining in China would only benefit or even cement their overall control of Bitcoin in the long run.

Perhaps Bitmain and Jihan Wu are being paid/compensated to attempt to exact further control over Bitcoin and its development. Having Segwit, LN, and staying with 1MB blocks would ultimately circumvent much of that control.

This sounds like a typical fairy tale that only a reader of bitcoin reddit would believe. First off, Segwit and LN suck, but won't really have an impact on miner influence in the bitcoin space even if they are adopted.

Staying with 1MB is the reason bitcoin only occupies 45% of the total crypto market, down from 95% only six months ago. This dramatic fall in bitcoin's relevance can continue, if the small blockers want to keep working hard to surpress innovation.

And who pays the Core devs? Block stream is a $75 million front for the unproven and likely doomed sidechains business model.

And the supreme irony - Lightning is far more centralized than any other crypto...

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: Torque on July 12, 2017, 07:38:36 PM

The PBOC surely knows that China currently has a lock on Bitcoin mining, yet they do nothing to subvert it. I would think that further centralization of mining in China would only benefit or even cement their overall control of Bitcoin in the long run.

Perhaps Bitmain and Jihan Wu are being paid/compensated to attempt to exact further control over Bitcoin and its development. Having Segwit, LN, and staying with 1MB blocks would ultimately circumvent much of that control.

Fully agreed.

Torque

legendary

Activity: 3710

Merit: 5286

The PBOC surely knows that China currently has a lock on Bitcoin mining, yet they do nothing to subvert it. I would think that further centralization of mining in China would only benefit or even cement their overall control of Bitcoin in the long run.

Perhaps Bitmain and Jihan Wu are being paid/compensated to attempt to exact further control over Bitcoin and its development. Having Segwit, LN, and staying with 1MB blocks would ultimately circumvent much of that control.

2girls

sr. member

Activity: 1002

Merit: 254

Tontogether | Save Smart & Win Big

Quote from: MFahad on June 24, 2017, 05:28:41 PM

The US government found the sweet spot with regulation. They will not push much further. Getting them at the in and out doors is the way to go and the only real legal way that they had a chance. They knew they could get the exchanges to play alone and be good little boys because they are too afraid of losing the fees.

Do not forget that(assuming the all the software and servers don't need something) that an exchange can, in a sense, simply sit there and collect the fees as the people trade back and forth.

iamTom123

hero member

Activity: 490

Merit: 501

Quote from: TimJBenham on June 23, 2017, 08:04:50 AM

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

About the PBOC i am not 100% sure Bitcoin is not in their best interests. And I would guess they are also not sure. The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

Bitcoin is a means to subvert PBOC policy so it is hard to see how they can be in favor of it. Wu will be a tool of PRC policy when the Central Committee decides it has a Bitcoin policy. China is a communist dictatorship.

The idea that China will not harm Bitcoin because it is in the interest of the country not to seems to be effective in the Western type of thinking. But that kind of thinking is not true when we talk about countries already outside of the influence of Western democracies.

As proven in the past, given the right climate, China has a trait of committing unexpected things in order to protect its own interest. We are seeing it now -- as a foretaste -- in the fight for islets and islands located so far away from its economic boundaries. China right now appears to be a sheep wearing a while robe but deep inside its leadership is implementing a long-planned global domination economically, politically and even yes militarily.

I am always wary of China and the more other countries could open up for Bitcoin the better it will be for the cryptocurrency.

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: Kryptowerk on June 24, 2017, 08:11:18 AM

That's a pretty cool comparison chart. Did you create it?

No, I found it here:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.19721723

MFahad

hero member

Activity: 2506

Merit: 645

Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!

The US government found the sweet spot with regulation. They will not push much further. Getting them at the in and out doors is the way to go and the only real legal way that they had a chance. They knew they could get the exchanges to play alone and be good little boys because they are too afraid of losing the fees.

Kryptowerk

legendary

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1403

Disobey.

Quote from: deepcolderwallet on June 22, 2017, 09:19:09 PM

The main threats to Bitcoin are widely known, like 51% attack, Quantum computing breaking criptography, etc.

But based on this:

Although we all wish Bitcoin will some day be the #1 in value exchange worldwide adopted, it's easy to see that economically speaking Bitcoin is still a dwarf.

I can imagine many reasons Bankers and/or Governments would want to shut down and forbid decentralized trustless criptocurrencies. So what is stopping them to do this?

You'll say: 1st they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you and then (maybe) you win.

In my opinion Bitcoin economic size puts it in the "they laugh at you" level, as we can see MSM is doing in this: https://news.bitcoin.com/mainstream-journalist-makes-bizarre-attempt-at-living-for-a-week-using-bitcoin/

If I'm right, the next step is "they fight you".

How do you fellows see weapons and tactics to take Bitcoin over by a powerful agent? Don't even need to bring a counter-attack tactic, just how would you smart guys do that if you had unlimited economic power.

That's a pretty cool comparison chart. Did you create it?
However I have to admit: I am suprised the total money in circulation is only 2000x the current value of BTC. My gut feeling was always more like 20000x. This means a price of $2M+ for one BTC is pretty much impossible, unless there is a very high worldwide inflation. Based on these numbers I can't see BTC ever be valued higher than 100x of its current price.

taxmanmt5

legendary

Activity: 1190

Merit: 1024

There is much more to running an exchange than that, but it was just to prove a point that the exchanges, esspecially prior to KYC and other regs, have the best spot in the business. Higher fees and more traffic than the mining pools and the exchange is more of a "needed" part of the Bitcoin process.

classicsucks

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 504

Quote from: TimJBenham on June 23, 2017, 08:04:50 AM

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

About the PBOC i am not 100% sure Bitcoin is not in their best interests. And I would guess they are also not sure. The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

Bitcoin is a means to subvert PBOC policy so it is hard to see how they can be in favor of it. Wu will be a tool of PRC policy when the Central Committee decides it has a Bitcoin policy. China is a communist dictatorship.

If any government entity could control Bitcoin, they could use it to strengthen their exchange rates and weaken others, say the USD for example. It seems fairly obvious that the Chinese government is subsidizing certain miners with free electricity from hydro dams for mining, etc.

Bitcoin can be used for capital flight out of China, but it can also be used to flee other currencies and pump money into China. Isn't that net effect of the block rewards when they're mined in China and sold for USD?

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

Oh yes, that's another posibility... If Wu is a figurehead for someone with other interests, his actions will uncover him in the long term.

You say his actions will uncover him in long term... Isn't it already happening? Or happened? Have you already forgot the Unlimited fiasco?

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: Cranky4u on June 22, 2017, 09:50:33 PM

Use a public campaign claiming BTC is used for money laundering, funding criminals / terroists and unsafe. Oh, hang on, they have already been saying that for the past 5 years...

Anyone else agree we are already past the fight section?

I think we are now in the 'lets compete by making an authorised version' hence the big banks and government moving to blockchain technology whilst still ridiculing crypto-currencies in general.

Also you're confusing Bitcoin for Blockchain Technology. Two different things, Bitcoin was just the technology's first adopter.

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: TimJBenham on June 23, 2017, 08:04:50 AM

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

About the PBOC i am not 100% sure Bitcoin is not in their best interests. And I would guess they are also not sure. The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

Bitcoin is a means to subvert PBOC policy so it is hard to see how they can be in favor of it. Wu will be a tool of PRC policy when the Central Committee decides it has a Bitcoin policy. China is a communist dictatorship.

THANK. YOU.

Finally someone is catching with how I see the way it works.

AK47-

sr. member

Activity: 644

Merit: 250

If any organization will try to shutdown cryptocurrencies, It will make them even more popular especially among a demographic that had previously never heard of Bitcoin or other cryptocurrency. Moreover, if they will try to target the websites providing wallets and all. Many more will come up just like torrents one. It is really tough to end all the cryptocurrency world. Thus many governments are trying to ignore its presence and not bringing it to limelight much.

TimJBenham

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

About the PBOC i am not 100% sure Bitcoin is not in their best interests. And I would guess they are also not sure. The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

Bitcoin is a means to subvert PBOC policy so it is hard to see how they can be in favor of it. Wu will be a tool of PRC policy when the Central Committee decides it has a Bitcoin policy. China is a communist dictatorship.

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:21:53 PM

The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

Except for a few stupid congressmen moved by the smell of their asses.

bitserve

legendary

Activity: 1862

Merit: 1530

Self made HODLER ✓

Quote from: deepcolderwallet on June 22, 2017, 10:13:08 PM

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:06:59 PM

Quote from: deepcolderwallet on June 22, 2017, 10:02:17 PM

Quote from: cpfreeplz on June 22, 2017, 09:56:35 PM

Breaking news 2018: Trump wants to take over bitcoins and orders all of America to fight the war on cryptocurrencies by developing their own super asic to beat the Chinese at their own game. Every American will have to buy an asic and join TrumoPool to enjoy their freedoms. 51% attack to follow.

That definitely would MAGA. If POTUS decide not to shut crypto down, we would get finally rid of Wu's evil empire.

As much as I don't like Wu tactics, there's something your should consider. Wu is way more invested in Bitcoin than 99.99% so, no matter what tactics he employs in the short/medium term it is in his best interest that Bitcoin is a fucking success in the long term.

You have a point, sir.
Unless Wu is just a character played by People's Republic of China, which surely may not have the best interests.

Oh yes, that's another posibility... If Wu is a figurehead for someone with other interests, his actions will uncover him in the long term.

About the PBOC i am not 100% sure Bitcoin is not in their best interests. And I would guess they are also not sure. The macroeconomic implications of Bitcoin are so complex that I don't think no parties really know. And that's why no government has made any extreme move about it.

deepcolderwallet

full member

Activity: 294

Merit: 103

Quote from: bitserve on June 22, 2017, 10:06:59 PM

Quote from: deepcolderwallet on June 22, 2017, 10:02:17 PM

Quote from: cpfreeplz on June 22, 2017, 09:56:35 PM

Breaking news 2018: Trump wants to take over bitcoins and orders all of America to fight the war on cryptocurrencies by developing their own super asic to beat the Chinese at their own game. Every American will have to buy an asic and join TrumoPool to enjoy their freedoms. 51% attack to follow.

That definitely would MAGA. If POTUS decide not to shut crypto down, we would get finally rid of Wu's evil empire.

As much as I don't like Wu tactics, there's something your should consider. Wu is way more invested in Bitcoin than 99.99% so, no matter what tactics he employs in the short/medium term it is in his best interest that Bitcoin is a fucking success in the long term.

You have a point, sir.
Unless Wu is just a character played by People's Republic of China, which surely may not have the best interests.

Topic: How fragile is the pot we're putting our money in? (Read 2481 times)