Jump to content

rkbabang

Member
  • Posts

    5,787
  • Joined

Everything posted by rkbabang

  1. The only thing she gets wrong is the timeframe. I'd be very surprised if it was $1M by 2030, but also very surprised if it wasn't $1M by 2045.
  2. I’ve only ever used Coinbase, I buy and withdraw the BTC. I never leave it in there. I haven’t looked into any of the others. Edit: I just looked, I have about $800 worth in there now. That wouldn’t be life altering if I lost that. When it gets to a few $K I withdraw it.
  3. My average cost basis in the BTC I still own is about $5K. I’ve been buying small amounts every time the price drops since dropped under $25K and will continue to do so. If it goes under $10K I might significantly increase my holdings.
  4. I think long term the centralized exchanges will get more regulated, better capitalized, more professionally run, less scammy. And the decentralized exchange methods will become easier to use and more people will use them. In the short term there is going to be more instability and uncertainty, you will see more people calling it rat poison and more promoters as well, all of which will create opportunities for the patient.
  5. It is definitely is going to take some time to shake out and there are probably more shoes left to drop. When the magazine covers go from "Is this the end of crypto?" to "The death of crypto!", we know we're close. I don't expect Bitcoin to go up much from here (if any) until well after the next halving. And it could easily drop another 40-50%. As far as shitcoins go, there aren't many coins that I wouldn't be surprised to see drop another 90+% and many will never recover.
  6. LOL. I'm glad you didn't engage in hate speech against the religion of peace which wants her head. Literally.
  7. Thanks for sharing wise words from the great Library of Xerxes.
  8. Does it really matter where something was invented or by who? I was talking about the major build out to get it to the everyday consumer you are talking about who first developed it. Would it make a difference in our lives today if the lightbulb was invented by a government agency rather than Edison? Whether something is decentralized has nothing to do with who invented it. For all we know Satashi could be a front for a group within the NSA. It doesn't matter now because it exists. Most enthusiasts long for the day when we can walk into any store and purchase something with Bitcoin. That day will come. One step at a time.
  9. You are conflating so many different topics/concepts in this post it is hard to even respond to it. The backbone of the internet was largely created by private companies with some government funding. Spectrum is for wireless only and regulated by the US government in the US. You can go get yourself a domain name, set up a website and no one will regulate what you put on it. Websites are run by private companies, individuals, educational institutions, governments and everything else you can think of. Crypto exists on that same internet. FTX was a centralized exchange as was every exchange failure since Mt. Gox. Centralized exchange failures happen and will continue to happen.
  10. Sold! (digital copy only, as I already threw out the physical one). 1PhFJLCgZcpGxfVijQQCFdf7GMt3JDJjEp
  11. That’s another thing that makes Bitcoin far superior to gold. I wouldn’t trust a gold bar from some stranger on the street, but if he pays me in Bitcoin I immediately know that it is genuine and I don’t need to trust him. You can fake gold, you can counterfeit dollars or pesos, but when the BTC hits your wallet you know it is real whether or not you trust the person who sent it to you.
  12. That's a long way off, quantum computing is a lot like nuclear fusion, it is always 10-20 years away. There are quantum hardened algorithms Bitcoin could hard-fork to well before this becomes an issue. The average Joe isn't going to change until well after the institutions do. Go offer the average Joe a choice between an oz of gold or $20 and you'd be surprised what the answer will be. If their friends and neighbors all start using it, they will as well.
  13. No not just scarcity alone. I just drew a happy face on a piece of paper at my desk. It is a scarce commodity, as only one such drawing exists in the world, but I don't think it is very valuable. Bitcoin has been cloned probably thousands of times and even though they all have the same or similar code they are not as valuable as Bitcoin. Why? I will say what I said a few messages above: "whether it has been colorful shells from far away or rare shiny metals, the free market has always used the hardest thing to create, find, or duplicate as money, as long as it was also easily transported, divided, and fungible. That was gold for centuries, but right now on planet Earth it is Bitcoin." You can create another crypto, even one exactly like Bitcoin, but anyone with 51% more computing power than you can destroy it. Bitcoin is secure like nothing else is right now. And that is what makes it valuable. Yes. This is happening, but it won't be overnight. People are comparing Bitcoin, which is ~15 years old, to gold which has been in use for thousands of years. Expecting Bitcoin to take over the world overnight isn't realistic. This will be a many decades long project.
  14. I disagree with that part in the way that I think he meant it. There is a certain viewpoint that thinks money needs to be valuable for uses other than as money. I think having the properties which make something useful to use as money is a value in and of itself. Being good money is valuable without any other uses necessary. Money is the use. Bitcoin has been designed to have every quality a good money should have and it is extremely difficult to counterfeit . It's valuable because of the properties which would make it useful as money. It's funny that people think money should also do other things. No one looks at a car and says "Sure it can take you from point A to point B, but what else can it do? Can you wear it like jewelry"?
  15. Exactly. There will be no way to mine more BTC out of a near-Earth asteroid.
  16. This article is from 2009, by the late L. Neil Smith. Technically Bitcoin existed already, but the author hadn't heard of it yet. His point on gold toward the end is what I want to point out. from: "The Money of Your Choice" by L. Neil Smith and Rylla Cathryn Smith https://ncc-1776.org/tle2009/tle507-20090222-02.html "In the 16th century, the economy of Spain was more or less destroyed when conquistadores brought home tons of gold they'd looted from the New World. The value of gold, relative to other things, plummeted because the more there is of anything, the less any of it is worth, a phenomenon economists refer to as the "Law of Marginal Utility". Spain ceased to be a world power and became, instead, the first "sick man of Europe". In many ways, it has never recovered. (The Law of Marginal Utility, we insist, is not a law of economics or any kind of physical phenomenon—the quality of a commodity does not change simply because there is more or less of it—but is psychological in nature. If Man A has a thousand gold ounces, and Man B has a hundred, Man A will be less concerned about spending ten of his ounces, possibly because he will have many more left, at the end of such a transaction, than would Man B.) The future of monetary standards based on precious metals lies in the stars, or, more accurately, in the Asteroid Belt, where roughly a third of the millions of rocks circling the Sun between Mars and Jupiter are composed of metals, mostly iron and nickel. Other metals are present in lesser amounts: it has been said that a single metallic asteroid a mile in diameter contains more gold than has ever been mined on Earth, lying within relatively easy reach of the asteroid's surface. Thanks to the Law of Marginal Utility, importing that much gold would halve the perceived value of the gold we already possess. Given a future that offers relatively easy and inexpensive means of importing gold and other metals from space—current proposals for "space elevators" present just such an opportunity—within this century, the entire future global economy could be affected in exactly the same way that Spain's was 500 years ago, if America (and humanity) relies on gold and gold alone as a monetary standard. On the other hand, allowing the market to decide, and to constantly re-decide, what is money—and what is not—would prevent such a catastrophe."
  17. I prefer Taco Tuesday to Humourless Humour Tuesday myself.
  18. You are now predicting what will happen 120 years from now? I'm not sure what will happen next year. EDIT: But to seriously answer your question. If some nodes tried to do this, they would just succeed in creating a valueless fork of the blockchain. Anyone can fork the chain at any time. This has been done numerous times already.
  19. I have no doubt you are 100% correct about his motives. He is doing what he thinks is right and has no desire to hurt anyone. You and he are correct in that bubbles do hurt people even if the asset which is bubbling has significant long term value, the crashes in price can cause significant pain to those not expecting it or prepared for it. I just think he's wrong about the long term value.
  20. You'd be betting on SEC approval for an ETF. If that approval never comes the gap with NAV will only keep widening. I have no way to gauge how likely that approval is. The market certainly doesn't think that it's inevitable.
  21. I look at it differently. The money / store of value function of gold IS its utility. This is something humanity needs, same as we need transportation, communications, food, water, etc, etc. BTC is a pure play store of value, better at it than gold, without the other uses complicating things.
  22. Not an exact comparison, since silver tarnishes and gold doesn't. Aluminum would actually be a better comparison. Gold however is far more rare than silver or aluminum. So maybe the over valuation isn't quite 99%, but you are in the ball park.
  23. I don't know what the ultimate value of BTC will be, or even should be. No one does, but that doesn't mean it isn't calculable. There are 21M BTC (I know some have been lost, so 21M at most). The wealth which it will need to ultimately store is in the tens (maybe hundreds) of trillions USD. You can get a rough number from that. You don't need to be exact just roughly right. If I am correct it will reach a point where it is stable and grow only with the productivity of the economy. It will be a roller coaster until then as money is as much a cultural thing as it is a market or political thing. It will take time.
  24. Gold would have very little value if used only for its industrial uses. It would be priced much lower and used much more if it wasn't valued as money or a store of value.
  25. Exactly. This was setup to fail. What you see failing and what you are going to continue to see failing are the centralized "coins" and exchanges. It is a proof that public blockchains have value not a refutation of it. Creating a centralized organization around crypto is like writing an email, saving it on a floppy disk, and mailing it via the USPS. "See! Email is useless!"
×
×
  • Create New...