Topic: When in 2013 shall Bitcoin break its all-time-high of $31? - page 2. (Read 8877 times)
Let's call this rally the Kutcher Effect. It may be short lived, but if the devs (and the wannabes like me) keep the innovations going, the hype cycle will continue.
I don't think so. 2015 or maybe 2014. The surges in prices are less extreme now. I don't think we will see any +100% years. $20 maybe.
This. There are simply too many holders of large collections of bitcoins and as the price increases it's easier and easier for less and less bitcoins to push it back down. There'd need to be a lot more money on MtGox to get back to $31 and that's just to get there. There'd need to be even more money to keep it there. We're probably years away from that.
It's funny to read (not so) old prediction threads.
The correct answer is First Quarter. It means that the up-trend of Bitcoin is way too strong than the average expactation of its participators.
Guys I just want to say... I did some back of the envelope calculations... and I also had some bourbon... if we break $31...
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
So, those 22BTCs are yours then?
I think we can do it... by we I mean you guys. Just spend another $2 million on bitcoins, and I'll have my $682
Just out of curiosity: what are you gonna do with your $682 now?
And the answer is... today!
I'll reply to this thread both periodically (at end of each quarter) and aperiodically (as now).
Now it's first quarter of 2013, let's ride the bull and see in the mean time...
Anyway, let's kindle some fireworks now to celebrate both the bull run and the Lunar New Year (the Year of Snake).
Happy New Year!!!
Now it's first quarter of 2013, let's ride the bull and see in the mean time...
Anyway, let's kindle some fireworks now to celebrate both the bull run and the Lunar New Year (the Year of Snake).
Happy New Year!!!
The price will drop back down under $4 when people cash out to buy Christmas presents like last year.
So, where's the $4? I wanna buy some coins.
Sweet you could buy... some more, umm.... GPUs?
Guys I just want to say... I did some back of the envelope calculations... and I also had some bourbon... if we break $31...
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
So, those 22BTCs are yours then?
I think we can do it... by we I mean you guys. Just spend another $2 million on bitcoins, and I'll have my $682
Guys I just want to say... I did some back of the envelope calculations... and I also had some bourbon... if we break $31...
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
So, those 22BTCs are yours then?
Guys I just want to say... I did some back of the envelope calculations... and I also had some bourbon... if we break $31...
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
... I'll be rich. *raises glass*
I personally wouldn't identify Bitcoin as fiat currency, at least not in the sense of "by legislative fiat". There are no legal-tender laws granting special privilege to bitcoin. However, calling it fiat isn't strictly wrong, since fiat is Latin for "let it be done", thus the interpretation of the word can be flexible.
Isn't a fiat currency by definition issued by or at least backed by government?
That's how I think of it, yes, but the world fiat is a bit more flexible than that in its true meaning. Personally, I do not consider bitcoin to be a fiat currency at all, even though it isn't gold or silver.
Yeah I don't think most would consider it fiat currency either. I see what you mean about the definition of fiat, but I think the word takes on a different meaning when you throw the word currency behind it.
No. If price followed cost of production then the price would be at least $20 right now. However, people won't be willing to sell their Bitcoins for less than what they spent to generate them, so it's partially true.
Where do you get that idea from? For current generation hardware difficulty would need to at least quadruple before cost of production would be $20.00 and all signs indicate a slow decline in difficulty until ASICs are released.
A well built GPU rig can achieve 3 MH/J and $2 per MH/s in capital costs. Lets amortize that over 12 months (assume zero residual value) and a moderately low power cost of $0.07 per kWh.
Hashes per BTC = (nonces per diff 1 * difficulty) / (BTC per block)
Hashes per BTC = (2^32 * 3.4E6)/ ( 25 )
Hashes per BTC = 5.84E14
MH per BTC = 5.84E8
Power costs per BTC (@ $0.07 per kWh):
Power per BTC = (5.84E8 / ( 3 * 60 * 60 * 1000)
Power per BTC = 1351 kWh
Power cost per BTC = 1351kWh * $0.07 per kWh = $3.785
Capital cost per BTC (@ $2 per MH/s & 12 month amortization):
Lifetime MH per dollar of capital cost = (1 MH/s / $2.00) * (60s * 60s/h * 24h/d * 365d)
Lifetime MH per dollar of capital cost = 1.58E7 MH/$
Capital cost per BTC = (1.58E7 MH/$) / (5.84E8 MH / BTC)
Capital cost per BTC = $0.27 per BTC
Total Amortized Cost = $4.06 per BTC*
*Note this isn't to say one should be building new rigs today given the future difficulty may be magnitudes higher due to ASICs however I didn't want to include only the power component of an existing rig.
I personally wouldn't identify Bitcoin as fiat currency, at least not in the sense of "by legislative fiat". There are no legal-tender laws granting special privilege to bitcoin. However, calling it fiat isn't strictly wrong, since fiat is Latin for "let it be done", thus the interpretation of the word can be flexible.
Isn't a fiat currency by definition issued by or at least backed by government?
That's how I think of it, yes, but the world fiat is a bit more flexible than that in its true meaning. Personally, I do not consider bitcoin to be a fiat currency at all, even though it isn't gold or silver.
I personally wouldn't identify Bitcoin as fiat currency, at least not in the sense of "by legislative fiat". There are no legal-tender laws granting special privilege to bitcoin. However, calling it fiat isn't strictly wrong, since fiat is Latin for "let it be done", thus the interpretation of the word can be flexible.
Isn't a fiat currency by definition issued by or at least backed by government?
0.2-0.6% daily increase where does that put us?
Ask your calculator or a spreadsheet.
0.2-0.6% daily increase where does that put us?
I personally wouldn't identify Bitcoin as fiat currency, at least not in the sense of "by legislative fiat". There are no legal-tender laws granting special privilege to bitcoin. However, calling it fiat isn't strictly wrong, since fiat is Latin for "let it be done", thus the interpretation of the word can be flexible.
In conclusion, When we look back in a few years we will see a slowly rising price, But is it BTC rising or fiat currency's devaluing?
It's both. Faith is growing in bitcoin. Faith is declining in fiat, as it very well should. All fiat currencies eventually and inevitably return to their intrinsic value, zero.
Pulling up this post from the first page as it was the gem of the thread for me, (specifically, it was the bolded part that caught my attention)
While I agree (kind of) with Bitcopia's view, I would add to that bolded statement as follows: "All previous fiat currencies eventually and inevitably return to their intrinsic value, zero."
The reason I add the previous modifier to his statement is that while most people consider fiat to be tied to government - because all previous fiat moneys have been government backed - it should be noted that a fiat money system need not be backed by government, but that a fiat money backed by a global population (i.e. Bitcoin) would be just as legitimate. (very easily argued to be more legitimate)
Add in the fact that Bitcoin (so far) can not be inflated beyond the built-in inflation designed into the system, and you can see that Bitcoin (or something much like it) has the potential to be vastly superior to the current basket of fiat moneys that are flooding the globe. (In most cases, perhaps all, it is the runaway inflation that ultimately kills such government backed fiat currencies throughout recorded history)
(* NOTE: I'm not sure that the declining rate of inflation is the best way to do a fiat money system. It has many benefits, such as promoting adoption, but has some harsh drawbacks as well... A system which tied inflation to population might be preferable, but I do not see an easy (or fair) way to boot-strap that kind of monetary system. *)
In conclusion, I consider bitcoin to be a fiat money system, backed by the fact that it is easily transferable across great distances, possibly infinitely fungible, and, (as yet) impossible to counterfeit. And yet I do not see the price rising above $31 in 2013. I have the feeling that the collapse of the current system may take longer than most of us would like.
No. If price followed cost of production then the price would be at least $20 right now. However, people won't be willing to sell their Bitcoins for less than what they spent to generate them, so it's partially true.
True, but there are over 10 million of bitcoins on the market so the next that are mined now are even less part than before.
Jump to: