Topic: The state of crypto - The only serious thread on the subforum - page 2. (Read 19463 times)
September 26, 2015, 03:54:51 AM
Is Anonymint still alive?
September 22, 2015, 09:41:52 PM
i just hope btc comes back into alts.
shit let along hoping btc recovers soon enough!
shit let along hoping btc recovers soon enough!
Succesful market pegged assets will be big in bringing money in. Most people don't have time to babysit the exchange window all day making sure BTC doesn't go down.
Nubits is run like a ponzi scheme but BitUSD in BTS 2.0 should be good.
September 22, 2015, 09:37:17 AM
i just hope btc comes back into alts.
shit let along hoping btc recovers soon enough!
shit let along hoping btc recovers soon enough!
September 22, 2015, 03:04:08 AM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully.
People don't know this already about Facebook, Google, banks, NSA, etc.?
I don't believe it. They know but they just don't care. I imagine this is a great disappointment to Snowden. He revealed all sorts of amazing things about the extent of the surveillance, at apparently great personal cost. He probably thought it would be earth shattering. The earth didn't even start to crack. For the most part (other than a few large corporations worried about losing business from other large corporations) people just don't give a shit.
Maybe the tide will turn when they start caring, but what causes that (and when) I don't know.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.... I don't think its a matter of people "not caring", its apathy / defeat / hopelessness. Snowden releases some shit - great. What am I going to do to change things? Go to protests? Write my congressman? Vote?
cryptocurrency is just software you can run. People just don't know the kind of tool that bitcoin is.
Thus, imo, its a lack of knowledge.
People rather are aware of survivalnce. The problem is that they dont see the long term consequences of this. The common attitude is that "i dont have to worry and I have nothing to hide because I dont do anything illegal or fishy". And if try to tell them that they should start caring about their privacy, they immediate assume you have something to hide, that's why you are "not an open book".
September 22, 2015, 02:51:57 AM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully.
People don't know this already about Facebook, Google, banks, NSA, etc.?
I don't believe it. They know but they just don't care. I imagine this is a great disappointment to Snowden. He revealed all sorts of amazing things about the extent of the surveillance, at apparently great personal cost. He probably thought it would be earth shattering. The earth didn't even start to crack. For the most part (other than a few large corporations worried about losing business from other large corporations) people just don't give a shit.
Maybe the tide will turn when they start caring, but what causes that (and when) I don't know.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again.... I don't think its a matter of people "not caring", its apathy / defeat / hopelessness. Snowden releases some shit - great. What am I going to do to change things? Go to protests? Write my congressman? Vote?
cryptocurrency is just software you can run. People just don't know the kind of tool that bitcoin is.
Thus, imo, its a lack of knowledge.
September 22, 2015, 02:25:09 AM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully.
People don't know this already about Facebook, Google, etc.?
I don't believe it. I think they just don't care.
Maybe the tide will turn when they start caring, but what causes that (and when) I don't know.
No because there haven't been many widespread breaches that hit their wallet or head (Ashley Madison's) to really care about on a global basis to affect the market. However I do believe its just another cycle and trust in government and other centralized services has already peaked.. thats just opinion. If one can see that it has peaked and that people are caring more and more and there is an exponential function we are on with regards to trust and privacy with privacy/non-trust being on the hockey stick end of the curve then its smart IMO to be prepared and invested in technologies that specializing in decentralization(trustlessness) and privacy. Perhaps not having trust is a stronger driver because it is affected by more markets but I believe both are parallel drivers bringing us to the same objective in a cryptocurrency.
Whether that currency is adopted is a whole 'nother subject but atleast we know there will be money coming in to the subject of interest because people suddenly have started caring.
Good analysis of the potential for upside.
September 21, 2015, 07:22:27 PM
That comes with European shops doing business through a US based company.
my only argument was that i think crypto has a big advantage over paypal (maybe excpect for us-shops). they can follow their own law and dont have to worry about us-law.
but paypal is everywhere: a shop which doesnt use it has a disadvantage against its competition: which is the real problem.
September 21, 2015, 07:19:55 PM
Most people into crypto also negates that many of the problems of the current economic system are at the same time very much needed. That's why Bitcoin had plenty of scandals and there are a lot of scam sites, suspicious gambling ones, etc. It's not regulated alright, but that also is a huge problem for people to really adopt it. Also I'm tech savy (graphic designer), I may be not a developer or engineer but buying Bitcoin was extremely frustrating and time consuming to say the least. Who wants to have these problems when there's Paypal and Credit Cards really?
Like smooth said, Snowden uncovered some ugly truths and nobody even recall his name, what he did or who he is but they do know who Bradley Cooper or Kanye West is though. My point is, for 99% of the people would be much more important to use Bitcoin to get the last Kanye West album than to hide from a 1984 Big Brother Government.
I really don't understand what's the big deal about the government having access to my financial records unless I'm a gun dealer (and we don't even know if they do, at least not in my country).
Like smooth said, Snowden uncovered some ugly truths and nobody even recall his name, what he did or who he is but they do know who Bradley Cooper or Kanye West is though. My point is, for 99% of the people would be much more important to use Bitcoin to get the last Kanye West album than to hide from a 1984 Big Brother Government.
I really don't understand what's the big deal about the government having access to my financial records unless I'm a gun dealer (and we don't even know if they do, at least not in my country).
September 21, 2015, 07:16:02 PM
Really?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
no, i just dont want us-law enforced on european shops
That comes with European shops doing business through a US based company.
I know it looks a whole lot like you're a foreign citizen living under USA laws because the computer monitor is in your house on your soil in your country but the reality is those servers you're connecting to are owned and operated by US companies when you connect through PayPal.
If you don't want the US in your living room you're better off just cutting your Ethernet and smashing your wifi for starters.
Better yet, get everyone in your country to use a Chinese alternative. Then you can live under Chinese law.
Look there's no real liberating solution here. You live with the people who have literally tons of guns and who put bread on your table or you don't. Probably why this board has such an infinite underdog infatuation. Everybody sees nothing but infinite upside in having nothing but potential rather than working with what works.
Damn.
September 21, 2015, 07:07:14 PM
That's why I link Bitcoin future more to digital goods, media, entertainment and maybe small services (sort of how Paypal started with eBay). Not as an actual currency where you can buy an expensive car or ask for a huge loan. It's not really needed for that, it's needed for it's quickness and ease of use in my opinion.
Paypal has quickness and ease of use. Ease of use is probably better than any crypto since you can "send money to an email address". You can also set up recurring payments, which current cryptos also can't do.
For digital goods, small businesses, etc. it serves their needs almost perfectly. The only thing it doesn't have (which most users don't care about, as discussed in the last few posts) is independence from the existing banking system.
Yes exactly, but Paypal transactions are very expensive in many parts of the world, that it's only problem, plus the need for credit cards to fund it (which is basically the same for buying Bitcoin, which is very difficult if you are not in the US, plenty of people had been scammed. I've used VirWox and while the fees were ridiculous the service was very fast.
Anyway we are both saying the same thing. I guess there's always the chance that one of these alternative coins/startups is bought off and one can make some money, does this ever happened? I have some dollars on GEMZ coins for example, even if they get acquired or their app explodes I don't think I would make any money off it.
September 21, 2015, 07:03:19 PM
Really?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
no, i just dont want us-law enforced on european shops
September 21, 2015, 07:01:11 PM
Really?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
You'd toss out all of a government and military backed currency and an automated ubiquitous electronic payment system and implement an anarchistic unsupported model all over Cuban cigars?
I have to ask you, are you ill? Seriously, are you seeing someone for your condition?
September 21, 2015, 07:01:03 PM
That's why I link Bitcoin future more to digital goods, media, entertainment and maybe small services (sort of how Paypal started with eBay). Not as an actual currency where you can buy an expensive car or ask for a huge loan. It's not really needed for that, it's needed for it's quickness and ease of use in my opinion.
Paypal has quickness and ease of use. Ease of use is probably better than any crypto since you can "send money to an email address". You can also set up recurring payments, which current cryptos also can't do.
For digital goods, small businesses, etc. it serves their needs almost perfectly. The only thing it doesn't have (which most users don't care about, as discussed in the last few posts) is independence from the existing banking system.
IMHO not true
eg european shops which where selling cuban cigars (legally!) have been banned by paypal.
That's the nature of not having "independence from the existing banking system". There is whole layer of compliance, approval and exclusion associated with it (and Paypal is happy to add their own too, but in some cases it may just not be clear from the outside what pressures are placed on them by banks and the government -- see "Operation Chokepoint").
As I said, most users don't care. Paypal is well aware that its restrictions cause it to lose some business but it is small so they don't care either.
Another example that could be potentially be a large market: There has been explicitly-legal online gambling in the US for a few years now and only recently has Paypal quietly started to get back into that market. They've lost some business over the past few years with overly-broad restrictions but it won't matter if that business becomes large now that they are opening up to it.
I think Paypal may be vulnerable in that it isn't effectively marketed as a mobile service though. They or someone else will get that done too. I very much doubt it will be Bitcoin or any other crypto.
September 21, 2015, 06:55:47 PM
That's why I link Bitcoin future more to digital goods, media, entertainment and maybe small services (sort of how Paypal started with eBay). Not as an actual currency where you can buy an expensive car or ask for a huge loan. It's not really needed for that, it's needed for it's quickness and ease of use in my opinion.
Paypal has quickness and ease of use. Ease of use is probably better than any crypto since you can "send money to an email address". You can also set up recurring payments, which current cryptos also can't do.
For digital goods, small businesses, etc. it serves their needs almost perfectly. The only thing it doesn't have (which most users don't care about, as discussed in the last few posts) is independence from the existing banking system.
IMHO not true
eg european shops which where selling cuban cigars (legally!) have been banned by paypal.
EDIT: http://puffingcigars.com/cigar-news/cuban-related-transactions-banned-by-paypal/5729/
September 21, 2015, 06:51:00 PM
That's why I link Bitcoin future more to digital goods, media, entertainment and maybe small services (sort of how Paypal started with eBay). Not as an actual currency where you can buy an expensive car or ask for a huge loan. It's not really needed for that, it's needed for it's quickness and ease of use in my opinion.
Paypal has quickness and ease of use. Ease of use is probably better than any crypto since you can "send money to an email address". You can also set up recurring payments, which current cryptos also can't do.
For digital goods, small businesses, etc. it serves their needs almost perfectly. The only thing it doesn't have (which most users don't care about, as discussed in the last few posts) is independence from the existing banking system.
September 21, 2015, 06:03:34 PM
Like others said, you can discuss all you want about the technical aspects of a new coin, but the main an most important issue remains and it's an old one. To make actual people using it and go full mainstream. Security is even something minor in priority, there is credit card and bank fraud everyday with the actual system.
This is similar to what happens with the PC and MAC if you want. We all know Wozniak and others invented the technology but as amazing as it was, it needed a visionary to bring it to the masses. For that to happen, you need to make deals with Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. People will embrace Bitcoin or whatever cryptocoin they implement, that's it. Or they will create their own, which is most likely and that will be the one.
Bitcoin is like Napster if you want, Apple or a company like that will see the potential when it fits and create iTunes. But that took A LOT of impossible deals with the labels music industry moguls.
This is similar to what happens with the PC and MAC if you want. We all know Wozniak and others invented the technology but as amazing as it was, it needed a visionary to bring it to the masses. For that to happen, you need to make deals with Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. People will embrace Bitcoin or whatever cryptocoin they implement, that's it. Or they will create their own, which is most likely and that will be the one.
Bitcoin is like Napster if you want, Apple or a company like that will see the potential when it fits and create iTunes. But that took A LOT of impossible deals with the labels music industry moguls.
Somewhat reasonable analogy but as I recall Napster got literally nowhere where with big companies, and there certainly was not an entire nascent industry of VC-funded companies building around the Naptser ecosystem, whereas Bitcoin at least has some support from large companies (for example you mentioned Microsoft, which accepts Bitcoin) and many startups are building on Bitcoin, and this can really only be said to a significant extent for Bitcoin specifically (i.e. see above "to scale" list). Whether that is enough to not get replaced by iTunesCoin is hard to say, but the differences with the Napster experience are certainly there.
I understand the comparison is not perfect nor fair. However Napster had the piracy issue, their reputation was tainted. Bitcoin also has this to a much lesser extent, but really the average person doesn't care that it's "anonymous" or decentralized, for god's sake, they use Google and Facebook all the time. It just need to be somewhat secure, cheaper and easy to use. Bitcoin and others already have these features. To me it is inevitable that a major player will come out with it's own coin/currency and the rest are doomed.
It can be sort of a subscription and small limit plan too, kinda like store credit but that can be accepted and used in many places. If you have some extra iCoins, you can pay Spotify with that or renew a Netflix subscription.
Well look I think the existing payment methods are somewhat secure, cheap, and easy to use. Netflix, Spotify, etc. have how many subscribers? Amazon has how many customers? Somehow these people are getting along fine without Bitcoin. They don't miss it at all.
That's not even true for Napster. Napster had far more pull demand from (most) users than Bitcoin/crypto ever has, the latter being more of a solution in search of a problem. Exceptions maybe being things like online gambling (including coin speculation as a sort of gambling game) and online drugs.
There is a context here. When satoshi built and released Bitcoin it was in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis and there really was a desire for something better. Outrage over bailouts, Wall Street bonuses, etc. was mainstream. Strong hatred of banks and bankers was common. Even many in the power elite were open to alternatives. There really was a sincere and widely-held feeling that the system was broken. That was nearly a decade ago and much of that is gone. There are some low-level concerns, but the average Joe no longer gives a shit about banking one way or another. Politicians no longer mention it. The problem that Bitcoin was largely intended to solve no longer exists from the perspective of people who would need to adopt it.
If and when the pendulum swings back, then crypto will have a chance to actually do something useful. Until then, Bitcoin is languishing and all the rest have no chance at all, outside of the speculation game.
Yes I agree and I understand how Bitcoin came to be. Every 10 or 15 years there is an economic crisis of sorts so maybe in the next 5 years if Bitcoin is still alive can take advantage of the next one, that I can see as an option for it to go mainstream. I completely agree that the average joe doesn't care about it when things fine. So in order for Bitcoin to thrive and survive it needs some crisis or change of paradigm in both democracy and capitalism if you ask me. I don't see banks having the same power as once had, they are a dying breed in terms of what they used to be, now there are plenty of other options all over the world. Also I don't buy into the whole "banks are bad", they didn't scammed anyone, it was the people that didn't use common sense and enter a life of debt that was illogical to maintain. I'm not defending bankers because there was clearly some ethical issues behind the bubble but really, if I'm not a criminal, I don't need to make anonymous transactions, and no bank has ever robbed me perse, the risks were there and people took them.
That's why I link Bitcoin future more to digital goods, media, entertainment and maybe small services (sort of how Paypal started with eBay). Not as an actual currency where you can buy an expensive car or ask for a huge loan. It's not really needed for that, it's needed for it's quickness and ease of use in my opinion.
September 21, 2015, 05:56:45 PM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully.
People don't know this already about Facebook, Google, etc.?
I don't believe it. I think they just don't care.
Maybe the tide will turn when they start caring, but what causes that (and when) I don't know.
No because there haven't been many widespread breaches that hit their wallet or head (Ashley Madison's) to really care about on a global basis to affect the market. However I do believe its just another cycle and trust in government and other centralized services has already peaked.. thats just opinion. If one can see that it has peaked and that people are caring more and more and there is an exponential function we are on with regards to trust and privacy with privacy/non-trust being on the hockey stick end of the curve then its smart IMO to be prepared and invested in technologies that specializing in decentralization(trustlessness) and privacy. Perhaps not having trust is a stronger driver because it is affected by more markets but I believe both are parallel drivers bringing us to the same objective in a cryptocurrency.
Whether that currency is adopted is a whole 'nother subject but atleast we know there will be money coming in to the subject of interest because people suddenly have started caring.
September 21, 2015, 05:50:20 PM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully.
People don't know this already about Facebook, Google, banks, NSA, etc.?
I don't believe it. They know but they just don't care. I imagine this is a great disappointment to Snowden. He revealed all sorts of amazing things about the extent of the surveillance, at apparently great personal cost. He probably thought it would be earth shattering. The earth didn't even start to crack. For the most part (other than a few large corporations worried about losing business from other large corporations) people just don't give a shit.
Maybe the tide will turn when they start caring, but what causes that (and when) I don't know.
September 21, 2015, 05:29:17 PM
There will be a turning of the tide as people realize that centralized services are no longer viable because they steal information and sell it or give it up forcefully. The trust in government and other centralized entities will dwindle and be a calling card for decentralized services and applications. I guess its much like the cycle between private and public debt armstrong elludes to but once people are fed up they will switch. The value add of being decentralized will surface only when there is a strong enough market demand such that the average joe sees immediate need to switch over.
September 21, 2015, 05:23:01 PM
Like others said, you can discuss all you want about the technical aspects of a new coin, but the main an most important issue remains and it's an old one. To make actual people using it and go full mainstream. Security is even something minor in priority, there is credit card and bank fraud everyday with the actual system.
This is similar to what happens with the PC and MAC if you want. We all know Wozniak and others invented the technology but as amazing as it was, it needed a visionary to bring it to the masses. For that to happen, you need to make deals with Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. People will embrace Bitcoin or whatever cryptocoin they implement, that's it. Or they will create their own, which is most likely and that will be the one.
Bitcoin is like Napster if you want, Apple or a company like that will see the potential when it fits and create iTunes. But that took A LOT of impossible deals with the labels music industry moguls.
This is similar to what happens with the PC and MAC if you want. We all know Wozniak and others invented the technology but as amazing as it was, it needed a visionary to bring it to the masses. For that to happen, you need to make deals with Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook and Apple. People will embrace Bitcoin or whatever cryptocoin they implement, that's it. Or they will create their own, which is most likely and that will be the one.
Bitcoin is like Napster if you want, Apple or a company like that will see the potential when it fits and create iTunes. But that took A LOT of impossible deals with the labels music industry moguls.
Somewhat reasonable analogy but as I recall Napster got literally nowhere where with big companies, and there certainly was not an entire nascent industry of VC-funded companies building around the Naptser ecosystem, whereas Bitcoin at least has some support from large companies (for example you mentioned Microsoft, which accepts Bitcoin) and many startups are building on Bitcoin, and this can really only be said to a significant extent for Bitcoin specifically (i.e. see above "to scale" list). Whether that is enough to not get replaced by iTunesCoin is hard to say, but the differences with the Napster experience are certainly there.
I understand the comparison is not perfect nor fair. However Napster had the piracy issue, their reputation was tainted. Bitcoin also has this to a much lesser extent, but really the average person doesn't care that it's "anonymous" or decentralized, for god's sake, they use Google and Facebook all the time. It just need to be somewhat secure, cheaper and easy to use. Bitcoin and others already have these features. To me it is inevitable that a major player will come out with it's own coin/currency and the rest are doomed.
It can be sort of a subscription and small limit plan too, kinda like store credit but that can be accepted and used in many places. If you have some extra iCoins, you can pay Spotify with that or renew a Netflix subscription.
Well look I think the existing payment methods are somewhat secure, cheap, and easy to use. Netflix, Spotify, etc. have how many subscribers? Amazon has how many customers? Somehow these people are getting along fine without Bitcoin. They don't miss it at all.
That's not even true for Napster. Napster had far more pull demand from (most) users than Bitcoin/crypto ever has, the latter being more of a solution in search of a problem. Exceptions maybe being things like online gambling (including coin speculation as a sort of gambling game) and online drugs.
There is a context here. When satoshi built and released Bitcoin it was in the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis and there really was a desire for something better. Outrage over bailouts, Wall Street bonuses, etc. was mainstream. Strong hatred of banks and bankers was common. Even many in the power elite were open to alternatives. There really was a sincere and widely-held feeling that the system was broken. That was nearly a decade ago and much of that is gone. There are some low-level concerns, but the average Joe no longer gives a shit about banking one way or another. Politicians no longer mention it. The problem that Bitcoin was largely intended to solve no longer exists from the perspective of people who would need to adopt it.
If and when the pendulum swings back, then crypto will have a chance to actually do something useful. Until then, Bitcoin is languishing and all the rest have no chance at all, outside of the speculation game.
Jump to: