Topic: Is Facebooks approach into e-money the commercial end for Bitcoin or a boost? (Read 1129 times)
April 24, 2014, 01:28:27 AM
what I gather is that Bitcoin needs to make its' own Facebook 2.0. This can be used as a way to compare the benefits of Bitcoin vs What Facebook brings to the table which I suspect will not compare to Bitcoin in the fist place.
April 23, 2014, 11:06:07 PM
What I read in the media. the bitcoin was founded by members of e-gold. that would make a reasonable answer why they want to keep the bitcoin deregulated and unprofessional managed. once the bitcoin would be professionalised the big money would destroy the profits of small wallett owner.
The approach on bitcoins is buildimg up the technology and microsystem, thats a more sustainable way of building value as getting big money destroy the small guys (ask me for a more precise argumentation). so in a big picture drawn here, facebook will be the microsoft of the future and bitcoin the linux with 1 % marketshare. or the techies learned their lesson and they are strong enough to compete. unfortunately the geek generation has NO idea of finances and the potential of bitcoins. or do they have friends from the market? geeks dont want friends normally. lets see if they will lose again as in the 90es.
not looking good.
Any contribution in this thread is welcome.
The approach on bitcoins is buildimg up the technology and microsystem, thats a more sustainable way of building value as getting big money destroy the small guys (ask me for a more precise argumentation). so in a big picture drawn here, facebook will be the microsoft of the future and bitcoin the linux with 1 % marketshare. or the techies learned their lesson and they are strong enough to compete. unfortunately the geek generation has NO idea of finances and the potential of bitcoins. or do they have friends from the market? geeks dont want friends normally. lets see if they will lose again as in the 90es.
not looking good.
Any contribution in this thread is welcome.
April 21, 2014, 08:41:56 PM
Quote
Beginning April 24, Walmart will allow someone to send money from one Walmart in the U.S. to another, where it then can be picked up. The transfer takes less than 10 minutes. The fee is $4.50 to transfer up to $50 and $9.50 to send up to $900.
Western Union, in comparison, charges $5 for a money transfer of up to $50, but a transfer of $900 could cost $76.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/17/news/companies/walmart-money-transfers/index.html?hpt=hp_t3Western Union, in comparison, charges $5 for a money transfer of up to $50, but a transfer of $900 could cost $76.
Personally Im thinking its going to be more like the above online or amazon cash, paypal, etc . At best it'll be like, we control the worth and decide if you get to keep any. All the addresses will reside on their servers or something major like that. I will be surprised if it is open competition
April 21, 2014, 06:06:17 PM
Yes, let's trust mark zuckerburg with all our money, I don't see what could go wrong.
Seriously, if anything this will only make bitcoin more accessible to people because they will be used to digital money and you'll only need to explain that that Facebook is not really a safe place to keep your money.
And the many idiots that will not believe you (yes there will be many), screw them and let them learn the hard way that centralized systems are either corrupted from the start or will get corrupted soon after. And it's always the user (that's you) who loses.
Decentralized and tamper-proof is incorruptible by nature (you'd have to bribe/own over half the network to join your cause, which is next to impossable) and it's the only way forward.
Seriously, if anything this will only make bitcoin more accessible to people because they will be used to digital money and you'll only need to explain that that Facebook is not really a safe place to keep your money.
And the many idiots that will not believe you (yes there will be many), screw them and let them learn the hard way that centralized systems are either corrupted from the start or will get corrupted soon after. And it's always the user (that's you) who loses.
Decentralized and tamper-proof is incorruptible by nature (you'd have to bribe/own over half the network to join your cause, which is next to impossable) and it's the only way forward.
April 21, 2014, 02:42:57 PM
Neither. FB < Bitcoin. OP has it ass-backward. Devs are working on FB replacement built on btc blockchain. FB's days are numbered.
People hate change though. People get used to using something and they will still use it even if something else if far superior so Facebook will be around for a while. I think Facebook's exchange of money might serve some purposes but I would think it would just be a niche market. Bitcoin has many other purposes that Facebook could not compete with. For example, would anyone dare send millions of dollars using Facebook? Would they trust the security for that? I would hope not.
Also, they will run into some issues with international transfers of money I would think. This is just a couple things off the top of my head. 
April 21, 2014, 02:37:07 PM
Neither. FB < Bitcoin. OP has it ass-backward. Devs are working on FB replacement built on btc blockchain. FB's days are numbered.
April 21, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
Historic-Philosphic interesting article about the 'black swan phenomen' http://bitcoinmagazine.com/11784/bitcoin-black-swan-event/
The basics tenets for his Black Swan Theory come in three major criteria. We’ll list the criteria and evaluate whether bitcoin meets the criteria.
1. The event is a surprise:
Before Bitcoin, there were no examples of a currency unbacked by a nation that could be transferred to anybody in the world without trust. Before the introduction of the internet it would have been impossible. Outside of a handful of extreme fringe Cryptologists the idea was ridiculous for governments and banking institutions to comprehend. There were no plans to control it or stop it, let alone take it serious enough until it was too late to kill it.
Number one qualification: Yes.
2. The event has a major effect.
The currency has thus far reached at its peak about 12 billion dollars in total worth. It was only about 2.5% of the value of Google the search engine company. However now most, if almost all countries in the world know of bitcoin and many have issued warnings or bans for its banking systems to not use it. Bitcoin has created a swell of world-wide supporters and a tight-knit community. It has politicians, bankers, regulators, investors, and scientists scrambling to understand it, control it, profit from it and use it as a catalyst to change the world.
Number two qualification: Yes.
3. After the first recorded instance of the event, it is rationalized by hindsight, as if it could have been expected.
If we look back at two widely recognized Black Swan Events, we can evaluate the hindsight rationalization. With the Internet, we can now see that because of all the personal computers that were purchased in the 80s and early 90s…it was OBVIOUS that they were going to eventually going to be connected to share in in electronic mail and read the news. For 9/11 afterwards, “experts” suddenly connected the dots of rising anti-Americanism in the radical parts of the Muslim world. They suddenly “remembered” the bungled attempt to bring the World Trade Center buildings down with a car bomb in the underground parking lot a few years earlier and it was “obvious” that this same kind of thing was going to happen again.
Is bitcoin yet being analyzed and rationalized using a lens of history? Are we at a point yet where we have enough data available for businesses to create risk mitigation programs? Perhaps the jury is still out on this one. It’s still in the beginning stages and history has yet to decide where this bitcoin experiment will sit in the annals of history.
Number three qualification: – Undecided.
Bitcoin may be that Black Swan we’ve been waiting for.
The basics tenets for his Black Swan Theory come in three major criteria. We’ll list the criteria and evaluate whether bitcoin meets the criteria.
1. The event is a surprise:
Before Bitcoin, there were no examples of a currency unbacked by a nation that could be transferred to anybody in the world without trust. Before the introduction of the internet it would have been impossible. Outside of a handful of extreme fringe Cryptologists the idea was ridiculous for governments and banking institutions to comprehend. There were no plans to control it or stop it, let alone take it serious enough until it was too late to kill it.
Number one qualification: Yes.
2. The event has a major effect.
The currency has thus far reached at its peak about 12 billion dollars in total worth. It was only about 2.5% of the value of Google the search engine company. However now most, if almost all countries in the world know of bitcoin and many have issued warnings or bans for its banking systems to not use it. Bitcoin has created a swell of world-wide supporters and a tight-knit community. It has politicians, bankers, regulators, investors, and scientists scrambling to understand it, control it, profit from it and use it as a catalyst to change the world.
Number two qualification: Yes.
3. After the first recorded instance of the event, it is rationalized by hindsight, as if it could have been expected.
If we look back at two widely recognized Black Swan Events, we can evaluate the hindsight rationalization. With the Internet, we can now see that because of all the personal computers that were purchased in the 80s and early 90s…it was OBVIOUS that they were going to eventually going to be connected to share in in electronic mail and read the news. For 9/11 afterwards, “experts” suddenly connected the dots of rising anti-Americanism in the radical parts of the Muslim world. They suddenly “remembered” the bungled attempt to bring the World Trade Center buildings down with a car bomb in the underground parking lot a few years earlier and it was “obvious” that this same kind of thing was going to happen again.
Is bitcoin yet being analyzed and rationalized using a lens of history? Are we at a point yet where we have enough data available for businesses to create risk mitigation programs? Perhaps the jury is still out on this one. It’s still in the beginning stages and history has yet to decide where this bitcoin experiment will sit in the annals of history.
Number three qualification: – Undecided.
Bitcoin may be that Black Swan we’ve been waiting for.
April 21, 2014, 05:23:28 AM
Facebooks is going to ask for a bank license so it can distribute peer-to-peer money transactions.
It took over Transwise, which already did more as a billion in transactions and together with whatsapp and facebook, which is installed on almost every smartphone its going to be the new number one.
Backed with Peter Thiel, In-Q-Tel an investment department of the CIA, which are also sitting in Facebooks Board they have the tech Elite and Governmant support.
Hard to break?
What is having Bitcoin? The Bitcoin Foundation? https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board
LOL
I am having the feeling they are not playing in the same league.
It took over Transwise, which already did more as a billion in transactions and together with whatsapp and facebook, which is installed on almost every smartphone its going to be the new number one.
Backed with Peter Thiel, In-Q-Tel an investment department of the CIA, which are also sitting in Facebooks Board they have the tech Elite and Governmant support.
Hard to break?
What is having Bitcoin? The Bitcoin Foundation? https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board
LOL
I am having the feeling they are not playing in the same league.
Jump to: