Crypto Currency Thread
Discussion
The thing I do find frustrating about this thread is that there is no learning. It just shows how concrete headed middle aged men get. Bitcoin is still doing its thing, building an incredible unhacked ledger in public and day by day strengthening its position through reducing centralization and increasing the amount of computational power required to mine a block....this is why bitcoin price is rising.
Those who don't understand crypto still don't understand the core value of the ledger - it is becoming more secure every day precisely because it is NOT centralised. Facebook's coin will be tarnished by association with Facebook no matter how they try and open source it. It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin. So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
Those who don't understand crypto still don't understand the core value of the ledger - it is becoming more secure every day precisely because it is NOT centralised. Facebook's coin will be tarnished by association with Facebook no matter how they try and open source it. It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin. So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
Libra's effect on bitcoin might well be similar to AOL's profound effect on the mass adoption of the internet.
Libra will be a relatively safe place where the idea of a non-governmental currency may become very familiar in daily use, whilst opening the eyes to the benefits of money that's much further released from the shackles of government control and intervention.
Of course there are perils, too. The battle between government money, corporate money (FB certainly isn't alone) and people's money is fascinating, whichever side you sit on. Everyone has skin in the game - everyone holds money.
Libra will be a relatively safe place where the idea of a non-governmental currency may become very familiar in daily use, whilst opening the eyes to the benefits of money that's much further released from the shackles of government control and intervention.
Of course there are perils, too. The battle between government money, corporate money (FB certainly isn't alone) and people's money is fascinating, whichever side you sit on. Everyone has skin in the game - everyone holds money.
dimots said:
The thing I do find frustrating about this thread is that there is no learning.
It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin.
So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
How can you talk about not learning, and then follow it up with those 2 statements?! It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin.
So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
Bitcoin is totally useless as a store of value because it is so volatile that its value can change by 10%+ PER DAY! If you put in £10k today, you have no idea what that will be worth in 4 weeks time. Might be more, might be less, but how can you say that is a 'true standard' and a 'useful store of value'?
And for something which has sold itself on anonymity (mentioned by yourself many times as a benefit of bitcoin), how can you claim Facebook's motive is to skirt privacy, tax and KYC laws? Its EXACTLY what Bitcoin has promoted itself on and exactly why Bitcoin is so popular among criminals, hackers and drug dealers!
And people question why I express opinions? Because the rest of the thread is totally illogical, thats why!
Behemoth said:
Libra's effect on bitcoin might well be similar to AOL's profound effect on the mass adoption of the internet.
Libra will be a relatively safe place where the idea of a non-governmental currency may become very familiar in daily use, whilst opening the eyes to the benefits of money that's much further released from the shackles of government control and intervention.
Of course there are perils, too. The battle between government money, corporate money (FB certainly isn't alone) and people's money is fascinating, whichever side you sit on. Everyone has skin in the game - everyone holds money.
Yes this is very true. The political/business battle is quite separate to the technological one. Facebook may profit from this somehow, but I'm not much interested in what they're doing.Libra will be a relatively safe place where the idea of a non-governmental currency may become very familiar in daily use, whilst opening the eyes to the benefits of money that's much further released from the shackles of government control and intervention.
Of course there are perils, too. The battle between government money, corporate money (FB certainly isn't alone) and people's money is fascinating, whichever side you sit on. Everyone has skin in the game - everyone holds money.
Condi said:
How can you talk about not learning, and then follow it up with those 2 statements?!
Bitcoin is totally useless as a store of value because it is so volatile that its value can change by 10%+ PER DAY! If you put in £10k today, you have no idea what that will be worth in 4 weeks time. Might be more, might be less, but how can you say that is a 'true standard' and a 'useful store of value'?
And for something which has sold itself on anonymity (mentioned by yourself many times as a benefit of bitcoin), how can you claim Facebook's motive is to skirt privacy, tax and KYC laws? Its EXACTLY what Bitcoin has promoted itself on and exactly why Bitcoin is so popular among criminals, hackers and drug dealers!
And people question why I express opinions? Because the rest of the thread is totally illogical, thats why!
Bitcoin's 'anonymous' but provable transactions are perfect for the internet. It is a fantastic store of value as I have explained in the past - ignore short term volatility - you can store your bitcoin in your head and take them with you anywhere in the world. It's better than anything else on the planet, once you have your bitcoin on the ledger it's yours forever, wherever you are. Storing gold in your own vault is the second best option, but I don't know why anyone would bother.Bitcoin is totally useless as a store of value because it is so volatile that its value can change by 10%+ PER DAY! If you put in £10k today, you have no idea what that will be worth in 4 weeks time. Might be more, might be less, but how can you say that is a 'true standard' and a 'useful store of value'?
And for something which has sold itself on anonymity (mentioned by yourself many times as a benefit of bitcoin), how can you claim Facebook's motive is to skirt privacy, tax and KYC laws? Its EXACTLY what Bitcoin has promoted itself on and exactly why Bitcoin is so popular among criminals, hackers and drug dealers!
And people question why I express opinions? Because the rest of the thread is totally illogical, thats why!
dimots said:
Bitcoin's 'anonymous' but provable transactions are perfect for the internet. It is a fantastic store of value as I have explained in the past - ignore short term volatility - you can store your bitcoin in your head and take them with you anywhere in the world. It's better than anything else on the planet, once you have your bitcoin on the ledger it's yours forever, wherever you are. Storing gold in your own vault is the second best option, but I don't know why anyone would bother.
How are they perfect when they circumvent all the know your customer, due diligence and financial reporting rules that a) banks, by law, have to do? and b) the very same rules you're accusing Facebook of trying to avoid? Condi said:
How are they perfect when they circumvent all the know your customer, due diligence and financial reporting rules that a) banks, by law, have to do? and b) the very same rules you're accusing Facebook of trying to avoid?
I think you are confused. Bitcoin doesn't 'do' any of those things, companies or individuals do. Facebook is a company with billions of customers that has a track record of this kind of thing.Condi said:
Bitcoin is totally useless as a store of value because it is so volatile that its value can change by 10%+ PER DAY
It's an emerging asset. The volatility is a function of price discovery and is entirely speculative. That's no surprise to anybody.Speculators who have worked through their research think that the monetary policy of bitcoin could well have immense future value. Other speculators tag along for the ride without really understanding this foundation.
The volatility won't go away anytime soon, but that doesn't detract from the fundamentals. All the talk of criminals & drugs is a sideshow. Bitcoin's monetary policy is the salient element.
dimots said:
Bitcoin's 'anonymous' but provable transactions are perfect for the internet. It is a fantastic store of value as I have explained in the past - ignore short term volatility
I'm sure the people who bought in mid December 2017 would agree with you.
/s
I had to double check it wasn't resident BTC shill Behemoth who'd written that.
Behemoth said:
Condi said:
Bitcoin is totally useless as a store of value because it is so volatile that its value can change by 10%+ PER DAY
It's an emerging asset. The volatility is a function of price discovery and is entirely speculative. That's no surprise to anybody.Speculators who have worked through their research think that the monetary policy of bitcoin could well have immense future value. Other speculators tag along for the ride without really understanding this foundation.
The volatility won't go away anytime soon, but that doesn't detract from the fundamentals. All the talk of criminals & drugs is a sideshow. Bitcoin's monetary policy is the salient element.
Well blow me. The bloke who 'died' that ran that exchange has been answered.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2019/06/25/quadr...
https://www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2019/06/25/quadr...
dimots said:
I think you are confused. Bitcoin doesn't 'do' any of those things, companies or individuals do. Facebook is a company with billions of customers that has a track record of this kind of thing.
Yes, but if the companies involved have to satisfy those regulatory requirements (which at some point they will, if it is to be widely used) then unless there is a database of who owns the bitcoin accounts (and thus, someone has to do the DD on the person owning those accounts), it will be impossible for any financial institution to accept money into their accounts.Its exactly why customers have struggled to invest through regulated funds - its nigh on impossible to get them past a regulator! AFAIK the only traded fund doesn't trade in Bitcoin itself, but simply operates as a proxy.
dimots said:
The thing I do find frustrating about this thread is that there is no learning. It just shows how concrete headed middle aged men get. Bitcoin is still doing its thing, building an incredible unhacked ledger in public and day by day strengthening its position through reducing centralization and increasing the amount of computational power required to mine a block....this is why bitcoin price is rising.
Those who don't understand crypto still don't understand the core value of the ledger - it is becoming more secure every day precisely because it is NOT centralised. Facebook's coin will be tarnished by association with Facebook no matter how they try and open source it. It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin. So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
Indeed. Generally though the middle aged British men you speak of don't understand because they're part of the lucky few on this planet who have easy access to financial services in a relatively stable democracy. A new technology they have no stake in, tricky to use, which sits outside the existing system is not one they want to play with nor succeed. It goes against everything they've ever understood about money. I don't think they'll ever truly get it unless something serious like hyper inflation takes off with Pound Sterling. They're ok, they'll carry on, one day becoming the equivalent of those who still insist on paying with cheques, while the rest of the world moves on.Those who don't understand crypto still don't understand the core value of the ledger - it is becoming more secure every day precisely because it is NOT centralised. Facebook's coin will be tarnished by association with Facebook no matter how they try and open source it. It will not be useful as a store of value, it will not be a true standard like bitcoin. So what is it for? We all know Facebook's main motive will be to skirt privacy/KYC/tax rules.
dimots said:
The thing I do find frustrating about this thread is that there is no learning.
If it stops middle aged men from getting into trouble hanging out on street corners then I'm all for it. I'd be more of a regular visitor if it was focused on learning and what's going on, not the fundamental nature of it. It's the same people saying the same things literally for years on end.
It's gonna do what it's gonna do regardless of what any of us think and it looks like no one's interested in changing their thinking either. Fair enough. It makes for a stunningly boring and repetitive read though.
I think the problem is that there are vested interests. Now excuse the hyperbole a bit but you have one set of people who think Cryptocurrency will change the world and free everyone from the shackles of "the system". These are the people who will tend to ignore the negatives of Cryptocurrency and extol it's virtues decentralised, portable, free from central control etc
You then have the sceptics, usually but not exclusively people in the banking\trading sectors whose vested interest is in seeing the current status quo continue, Cryptocurrency is a potential threat to that status quo so you'll get all the it's not a real currency, it has no real value, it's not secure, it doesn't abide by any financial regulations, it's a scam type arguments and while some of these concerns are certainly valid, they are usually over-egged to the point where you tend to lose sight of some of the benefits that cryptocurrencies could bring.
I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle, fiat currencies aren't going away any time soon and BTC isn't going to be the shining independent currency that saves everyone from the evil machines of "the system" but the technology itself will definitely find a use and once it matures, will probably sit comfortably alongside other financial systems, all IMO of course.
You then have the sceptics, usually but not exclusively people in the banking\trading sectors whose vested interest is in seeing the current status quo continue, Cryptocurrency is a potential threat to that status quo so you'll get all the it's not a real currency, it has no real value, it's not secure, it doesn't abide by any financial regulations, it's a scam type arguments and while some of these concerns are certainly valid, they are usually over-egged to the point where you tend to lose sight of some of the benefits that cryptocurrencies could bring.
I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle, fiat currencies aren't going away any time soon and BTC isn't going to be the shining independent currency that saves everyone from the evil machines of "the system" but the technology itself will definitely find a use and once it matures, will probably sit comfortably alongside other financial systems, all IMO of course.
Condi said:
Yes, but if the companies involved have to satisfy those regulatory requirements (which at some point they will, if it is to be widely used) then unless there is a database of who owns the bitcoin accounts (and thus, someone has to do the DD on the person owning those accounts), it will be impossible for any financial institution to accept money into their accounts.
Its exactly why customers have struggled to invest through regulated funds - its nigh on impossible to get them past a regulator! AFAIK the only traded fund doesn't trade in Bitcoin itself, but simply operates as a proxy.
That will, of course, be needed at the ramps - the interface between bitcoin and fiat. But once you have bitcoin and only use it in a peer to peer situation, the need doesn’t exist. As I mentioned before, there is no more need for you and I to conduct KYC / AML on each other for one of us to pay the other in bitcoins / satoshis than if it was in used twenties Its exactly why customers have struggled to invest through regulated funds - its nigh on impossible to get them past a regulator! AFAIK the only traded fund doesn't trade in Bitcoin itself, but simply operates as a proxy.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 25th June 20:34
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff