Topic: What are the most convincing arguments against Bitcoin? - page 6. (Read 9236 times)

The usage pattern might change if the blocks are full, people will plan their transaction more carefully and less frequently. You don't change bank just because it is not open during weekend, you simply stop doing transactions during weekend

He's right, the steering wheel might need to be turned sooner than you think. Remember what Erik Voorhees did to the system with SatoshiDice? When confronted about bombing the blockchain with micro transactions he didn't care because he was "testing the system". Greed will force things on Bitcoin before it's ready. The only thing that can really destroy Bitcoin are the users or lack of users (see my previous post above).

Not true. The devs have been saying for quite a while "we're looking into it, and we'll be ready with a solution by the time it becomes a problem", which is quite different.

What you're suggesting is turning the steering wheel now because there's a bend in the road three miles ahead.

Bitcoin doesn't scale. Saying that 3rd party companies and offchain transactions will solve this goes against the very idea of bitcoin.
Also the deva saying "ohh, don't worry, we will look into it when it becomes a real problem" is a very bad sign IMHO.

I think there are four major arguments against Bitcoin, which are at least on the surface strong arguments against mainstream acceptance of BTC:

1) Volatility. As long as the exchange rate fluctuates wildly, BTC as a currency is highly unlikely to become mainstream. However, I think this is a short-term problem, as more acceptance/use of BTC will lead to less volatility, or more importantly, less tying the value of BTC to the dollar.

2) Technical Hurdles. Frankly, Bitcoin is currently too hard for "Grandma" to use right now. I also think this is a short-term problem, as the Internet was too hard for Grandma in 1997, but now just about everyone uses it with no problems. Entrepreneurs will solve this problem.

3) Lack of understanding. People today just don't understand what currency is. You see this in every argument against Bitcoin: What is the value of BTC? How is it different from Beanie Babies? Etc. As long as the average citizen thinks money gets its value from Big Brother, BTC will not be accepted mainstream. This is potentially a very serious long-term problem, but I do think this can be overcome as BTC is used by more and more merchants, and its "value" becomes more clearly understood.

4) Government oversight/pressure/crackdown. I think this is the biggest long-term challenge to BTC. Governments don't need to make BTC illegal, they just have to make it shady. By creating huge hurdles or onerous regulations regarding BTC transactions, the average Joe will not want to use it. Remember, most people on this forum are willing to go against the stream, but the average person wants to be right with their government and won't get involved in anything that even hints of trouble. With the fact that BTC upends many government controls, I can see this being the biggest long-term obstacle to mainstream BTC use.

i believe the Mycelium cold storage BIP38 encrypted QR code solution is a game changer.  the privkey is only held in RAM long enough to sign a tx and then is wiped upon closure.  great for on the fly usage.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1rkojh/bip0038_supporting_in_mycelium_is_targeted_for/

Half of China are watching porn behind VPNs anyway, what stops them from broadcasting transactions as well?

Piper,

not being in CS, could you elaborate further on the distinction btwn a protocol and software?  software can be adapted too, right?

The fact that governments could simply ban it, like China almost did. China officials even said that "legitimacy of our national currency can not be chalenged" or something along those lines, so there's one reason for governments to ban it. And governments banning Bitcoin would effectively push it back to underground where it's only used by hackers and drug dealers.

Also, the fact that there's no central authority regulating the price means that Bitcoin is not very suitable for exchange for goods and services, due to volatility. But that might? change when/if Bitcoin becomes bigger.

Fiat is NOT working for us. 

Our savings (i.e. buying power) are being stolen by the greasy corporatocracy through excessive money printing and ponzi betting in the form of derivatives which is estimated to be over 1 QUADRILION.  Global GDP is roughly 70 trillion.

There is a crisis of trust and people want out of fiat.  At least from US funny money.

We are expected to act honestly within a system that is stealing from us and parasitising us.  We have to figure out a way to protect ourselves from those who wield power over us.  One way is fair money.

There is currently a great window for Bitcoin until:

1) China or the BRICS nations, who are all buying gold like crazy, release a gold-backed currency that is again a stable store of wealth.  The masses I believe would rush to adopt that and fiats of endebted nations would collapse.  People might in that case also move somewhat away from Bitcoin.

and/or

2) Gold / Silver prices start rising again and some people move back from Bitcoin / cryptos.

Until then I think Bitcoin or maybe some other crypto have an awesome window of opportunity as people are looking for a store of value that isn't stealing from them.

But that will not increase the amount of Bitcoins being generated. The rate of creation of new BTCs will remain unchanged. So this will only be having a minimal effect.

By that time, we will have quantum cryptographic coins.... Qubitcoin. 

In the long term?

It's called a quantum-computer and it can make a bit be 0 and 1 at the SAME time, potentially solving any hash in a matter of microseconds.
So far, this still a theoretical thing, but scientists are working and getting closer on the concept.
If anything can destroy bitcoin at it's core, its that thing.

Volatility will always be a major character for bitcoin, so it is not suitable for day to day spending, only for long term saving

1. less of an issue as time goes on. regardless, not much can be done with a 51% attack anyway.
2. not really an issue. every argument ive seen about centralization misses key points on how they are wrong.
3. Pruning.

(this has all been gone over a crazy number of times and people still post crap after proper answers. and people still never look for answers)



i think one basic counter point to this is that no matter what, the gov waters down our USD. our money loses value. bitcoin may have its ups and downs currently but over the course of 6 months to a year, no matter what is happening, the bitcoins you hold are worth more now then they were before even if you included buying on the top of a 'crash'. If you have money to put into bitcoin that you can leave there then there really isnt a reason not to. having the ability to easily access that money and buy things with it is also really nice. once in the bitcoin system you dont have all those pesky bank and 3rd party fees. it may tie cash for ease of use. but eventually we may see some really interesting security features t protect your bitcoins from in person theft as well as online theft. really its only a matter of time before such things are history where it will be like "wait you used to have your wallet on your PC? no hardware encryption, multi sig or dedicated wallet system? dam i cant imagine risking half a bitcoin! that would have been my salary for year!"

Having to use fiat to use bitcoin is probably enough of a reason to stop A LOT of people from having a desire to use bitcoin. I would assume a lot of people don't care about any of the downsides of fiat so long as it's working for them right now.

I'll give you an example. If someone was about to walk into a coffee shop with $5 to buy a cup of a coffee and you said "hey give me that $5 an ill give you $5 worth of bitcoin and you can buy your coffee with it" MOST people would have zero interest in that because they see no point in it and it's extra one extra step just to buy something they can already buy.

With that said, that's fine. Bitcoin doesn't have to be used by everyone nor would it probably even be practical to use in certain situations, but I do believe everything I just said is a big reason why people would or do have no interest in bitcoin. It just seems pointless to them. 

Even if someones fiat currency crashed, they would still need to use it to use bitcoin if they didn't have any bitcoin. So again they would ask the question "why use bitcoin when I can already use the fiat currency I have".

Yep, I don't like Keynesianism either; a most fraudulent economic system. It has caused a lot of harm.

I don't. But Keynes thinks we should all lose wealth to big corporations that have first dibs on new money before it loses value.

Most convincing argument for failure? Ok, I'll try. Complacency and greed should do it.

Too many people are here to line their pockets by starting that next great Bitcoin gambling site or develop that next great multimillion dollar app that skyrockets them to fame and fortune or to buy cheap and sell high. In other words - profiteering scumbags.

Too few people exist on the planet that would use Bitcoin simply for altruistic reasons. The average person (not the ideologically pumped up college student or recent graduate) is concerned more about themselves and their little life than how great Bitcoin would be for the end of (insert name of the political philosophy/economic system you don't like here).

tl;dr

Mass adoption requires humans that don't exist en masse. Most are too greedy and stupid for Bitcoin to spread much beyond the pseudo–intellectual fringe and common crooks.

Why do you think that?