Also don't forget that the flaw of the blockchain size can be solved and there are already alternatives to the core wallet.
So how is that any different than using a bank? If you use an alternative, you are not in control of your coins.
Topic: Reasons to HODL! - page 6. (Read 7678 times)
So how is that any different than using a bank? If you use an alternative, you are not in control of your coins.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
Why are you surprised? The vast majority of people here are not network engineers.
Nothing I said requires an engineering degree.
I'm a network engineer as of 2006 - which means I understand what you are saying - but I don't have an engineering degree.
All the means is I can understand bullshit. Bitcoin suffers from a long block time (10m) and a large block chain (20gb).
Please tell me how I am mistaken using you non-engineering degree words.
No, Vod.
The reason that TCP/IP is not easily replaceable is exactly whats gonna happen with bitcoins adoption.
The key word being adoption and its network effect.
If bitcoins are widely adopted as a standard, it will be as hard to replace just like TCP/IP.
Bitcoins have a very big advantage over the altcoins, which is the headstart and the support from industry giants already.
TCP/IP might have been easy to replace in the Arpanet, not so much now.
Replacing bitcoins will be harder and harder, and we will adapt around its flaws, as long as there isn't a fatal bug discovered that destroys the confidence of its design... Or a new disruptive technology arises.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
The reason that TCP/IP is not easily replaceable is exactly whats gonna happen with bitcoins adoption.
The key word being adoption and its network effect.
If bitcoins are widely adopted as a standard, it will be as hard to replace just like TCP/IP.
Bitcoins have a very big advantage over the altcoins, which is the headstart and the support from industry giants already.
TCP/IP might have been easy to replace in the Arpanet, not so much now.
Replacing bitcoins will be harder and harder, and we will adapt around its flaws, as long as there isn't a fatal bug discovered that destroys the confidence of its design... Or a new disruptive technology arises.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
Also don't forget that the flaw of the blockchain size can be solved and there are already alternatives to the core wallet. So home users don't even need to deal with downloading a file of 20Gb. As of transaction times, there are ways to secure even zero confirmation transactions. TCP/IP which you mentioned are not flawless, and not fully flexible. But the internet flexes around it's flaws perfectly creating a fully functional environment. To me bitcoin has the potential to do this as well.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
Why are you surprised? The vast majority of people here are not network engineers.
Nothing I said requires an engineering degree to be understood.
Replace the TCP/IP example with vhs and betamax.
Cassette vs. DAT.
Mp3 vs. Flac.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
Why are you surprised? The vast majority of people here are not network engineers.
Itis the first cryptocurrency.
Nearly all crypto exchanges are using bitcoin as a medium of exchange.
Nearly all crypto exchanges are using bitcoin as a medium of exchange.
yeah! there's a reason big companies are adopting it, despite the price plunge
Companies don't care about the price. Exchanges and tools like bitpay allow them to instantly convert bitcoins to FIAT. To me, they don't even accept bitcoin as a payment even if they do. Essentially it's the exchanger that accepts the bitcoin as a payment through the fees and the company that cooperates with them gets to hold onto fiat.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
Precisely
@Vod, you clearly still don't get it. Your answer is ironically self-defeating, it proves my point.
No it's not. Those are just words you use to try and make your point.
No, Vod.
The reason that TCP/IP is not easily replaceable is exactly whats gonna happen with bitcoins adoption.
The key word being adoption and its network effect.
If bitcoins are widely adopted as a standard, it will be as hard to replace as TCP/IP.
Bitcoins have a very big advantage over the altcoins, which is the headstart and the support from industry giants already.
TCP/IP might have been easy to replace in the Arpanet, not so much now.
Replacing bitcoins will be harder and harder, and we will adapt around its flaws, as long as there isn't a fatal bug discovered that destroys the confidence of its design... Or a new disruptive technology arises. But even in that case, the new disruptive technology will have a very hard time convincih old users to switch over. And the harder it will be the later they come to market.
I am surprised that I had to spell it out.
yeah! there's a reason big companies are adopting it, despite the price plunge
I wasn't expecting to get this from vod, but like it or not what he said is partially right.
I'm not dissing bitcoin - I still hold a considerable amount.
I'm just pointing out what I consider the substantial flaws.
We can't predict the future. Be careful of what prediction you make.
Agreed 100%
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time.
I wasn't expecting to get this from vod, but like it or not what he said is partially right.
As of:
Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty.
We can't predict the future. Be careful of what prediction you make.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
Precisely
@Vod, you clearly still don't get it. Your answer is ironically self-defeating, it proves my point.
No it's not. Those are just words you use to try and make your point.
It's ecosystem is at the progress of becoming mature. Bitcoin startups attract many venture capitals to invest specific projects to offer useful application in our daily lifes. Such coinbase,bitpay as bitcoin payment processor are providing accepting bitcoin payment solution for merchants. Circle provides bitcoin bank service for global customers.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
Precisely
@Vod, you clearly still don't get it. Your answer is ironically self-defeating, it proves my point.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
It's not easy to upgrade from IPv4 to IPv6. It's not easy AT ALL to move from TCP/IP to another protocol.
Very easy to move from bitcoin to futurexxxcoin. It's a simple program on a machine that you can delete. Install another.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
There are better protocols than TCP/IP and IPv4.
And yet we are still using them. Ask yourself why, and you might understand why such "flaws" might actually be irrelevant.
Bitcoin has serious flaws. The blockchain size and the block time. Other coins are going to rise up, each having mathematical certainty. Other reasons?
Any other reason comes to mind?
Mathematical certainty of bitcoin's future dominance comes to mind. 
I am reminding you guys some relevant facts:
1) Paypal is accepting bitcoins
2) Bill Gates declared to be a bitcoin fanboy, very interested in its technology. (So bad he can't own it! Ha)
3) A bitcoin ETFs will be launched soon in Wall Street.
4) SecondMarket is a bitcoin trust with over 70Millions in investments.
5) Pantera Capital has been dealing in bitcoins since the beginning.
6) Even if you don't like it, companies offering user friendly insured wallets popped up in our ecosystem such as Xapo and Circle. Both have substantial investments behind and their products are quite impressive.
7) Assholes such as Butterfly Labs and MtGox are gone. Amateur time is over.
Any other reason comes to mind?
I think these are already quite plenty.
Jump to: