# Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?



## quirky (Apr 13, 2018)

I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?

PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 13, 2018)

Invest what YOU PERSONALLY ARE PREPARED TO LOSE.

You may lose or you may gain   in this respect its like investing in Shares/Stock

Investing in equipment/hardware to Mine  not wise unless your more knowlagable


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 13, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?
> 
> PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.



I need very little to be happy in this life. Therefore, I keep some of my money in gold, but most of it in the bank. I could care less if I am missing out, conquer the greed and envy that dwells within like the ancient Stoics did, and you will find true happiness.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 16, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?
> 
> PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.



last year it all looked good... this year its lost 60% of its peak value and dosnt look so good..

in truth its an unknown.. prices are currently low and seem to have bottomed out and if there is a good time to invest it would be now.. i still think its due to go up again from now but nobody knows for sure..

one think is for sure.. your money isnt going to earn bugger all sat in the bank.. it all comes down to how you feel.. nothing risked nothing gained.. all i can say is i own some gold some silver and some crypto.. i aint gonna swap any of it for fiat money in the bank.. make of that what you will.. 

trog


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 16, 2018)

trog100 said:


> last year it all looked good... this year its lost 60% of its peak value and dosnt look so good..
> 
> in truth its an unknown.. prices are currently low and seem to have bottomed out and if there is a good time to invest it would be now.. i still think its due to go up again from now but nobody knows for sure..
> 
> ...



If fiat crashes, so does the food industry. You will be growing food just like the rest of us of fiat crashes to worthless levels. Globalization has become far too dangerous in this sense, I wish it wasn't so.


----------



## qubit (Apr 16, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> Invest what YOU PERSONALLY ARE PREPARED TO LOSE.
> 
> You may lose or you may gain   in this respect its like investing in Shares/Stock
> 
> Investing in equipment/hardware to Mine  not wise unless your more knowlagable


+1 it's literally a gamble. There's a lot of work to get in the know about this or you'll definitely lose. Personally, I can't be bothered.


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 16, 2018)

qubit said:


> +1 it's literally a gamble. There's a lot of work to get in the know about this or you'll definitely lose. Personally, I can't be bothered.



I don't have enough fiat money to risk losing any of it, as fiat pays my rent and food at the moment, and fiat is what employers give me. If you want to risk a gamble then go for it, but make sure you have enough to fall back on if you lose all of your investment, nothing is promised. You don't want the stress of being flat out broke, trust me.


----------



## qubit (Apr 16, 2018)

lynx29 said:


> You don't want the stress of being flat out broke, trust me.


Oh gawd no, I've been there.

EDIT: +1 to the rest of your post.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 16, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?
> 
> PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.



To be fair you're already way too late in the game to get a meaningful return on investment. It really is a gamble now, and you'd already be gambling on a significant price increase, which is hardly a good way of investing money. Crypto mining is turning mainstream and when that happens it really is too late. Public opinion is also turning against mining and proof of work and that turn may happen faster than you'd want.


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 16, 2018)

Being in the future and being the future are two different things.  Crypto will exist in the future but it is impossible to know if it will be the future.  There is a lot of resistance to make sure it is not the future.

Don't bother getting into mining, you missed the boat and will most likely never make your money back.  If you invest now, you probably have the best chance of making some money but don't expect to be rolling around on a bed made of benjis.  Instead, expect to likely never see some or all of that money again.  If you ok with this, start pouring your money in.  Coinbase may be a good place to start.


----------



## Vya Domus (Apr 16, 2018)

Probably not. Even if it's going to be , it wont make your life better or make you rich overnight somehow. You can change the currency all you want , if other sociopolitical and economical aspects don't improve it wont make a damn difference.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 16, 2018)

I will quote an investor I trust:

"If you are nervous about an asset, just don't"


----------



## trog100 (Apr 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I will quote an investor I trust:
> 
> "If you are nervous about an asset, just don't"



currently there should be a lot of nervous investors... nor an asset a person should not be nervous about.. people are still investing though.. he he..

i am not buying any more crypto but then again i aint selling what i have.. my miner is still running and aint selling that ether.. 

trog


----------



## Vario (Apr 16, 2018)

IRS is looking into taxing capital gains from crypto, a lot of crypto investors should be concerned about their compliance.


----------



## blobster21 (Apr 16, 2018)

> My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?



Unregulated moneys are like smokescreen to me, you dive at your own risks.


----------



## StrayKAT (Apr 16, 2018)

Outside of a world war cleaning the slate of powerful actors, I doubt it's going to be the "future" per se.

And those who think it's going to happen through some silent revolution of adoption, somehow don't realize what kind of nightmare we live in.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 16, 2018)

It's not the future/fool proof. You are safer doing a job and working, spending wisely and saving than laundering money virtually.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Apr 17, 2018)

Vario said:


> IRS is looking into taxing capital gains from crypto, a lot of crypto investors should be concerned about their compliance.



thats easy though. i use bitcoin.tax, import the .CSVs from the exchanges i use and just give the forms it generates to my CPA.

just make sure that at each taxable event (ie. each sell or trade) you put enough fiat aside for taxes.


----------



## Jetster (Apr 17, 2018)

Of course its the future, no questioning that. But it will be about 20 years and a painful transition


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 17, 2018)

Yes ... future's version of the Ponzi scheme


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 17, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> laundering money virtually.



That's not really what investing in crypto is, just FYI.



Vario said:


> IRS is looking into taxing capital gains from crypto, a lot of crypto investors should be concerned about their compliance.



I'm honestly not concerned at all.  I have records and a guy for that.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 17, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> That's not really what investing in crypto is, just FYI.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm honestly not concerned at all.  I have records and a guy for that.



So what tangible item is a foundation for this stuff then? This to me feels like credit


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 17, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> So what tangible item is a foundation for this stuff then? This to me feels like credit



Still trying to figure out how claiming and paying taxes on crypto income or not being attached to a tangible item is suddenly laundering.

Beyond that, how could it be credit?  No one has to pay back their crypto transactions or income.  Well, I suppose unless you borrowed it...


----------



## Steevo (Apr 17, 2018)

No, it's based on a fundamentally flawed idea, with no physical force to enforce it's value.


----------



## silkstone (Apr 17, 2018)

Steevo said:


> No, it's based on a fundamentally flawed idea, with no physical force to enforce it's value.



Kind of like diamonds?


----------



## trog100 (Apr 17, 2018)

Steevo said:


> No, it's based on a fundamentally flawed idea, with no physical force to enforce it's value.




kind of like the fiat money system we currently use.. he he

backed by nothing except faith and how many trillions of debt can be incurred before it all collapses and that "faith" disappears.. and  maybe the US military if that fits the physical force definition..

trog


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 17, 2018)

And that makes it laundering or credit how?

Also, there are currencies that are attached to a structured system ala music coin.  Don't just repeat moronic fallacies, if you don't like crypto fine - don't join in the conversation.  But if you are going to discuss, make an effort to understand the system.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 17, 2018)

eidairaman1 said:


> So what tangible item is a foundation for this stuff then? This to me feels like credit



Credit isn't "money laundering" either.

And it's not like credit.  The investor money you get for selling is yours permanently.


----------



## hat (Apr 18, 2018)

I don't think it's "the future" in it's current state, no. Cryptocurrencies today are fundamentally flawed, and I don't think they would be ready to replace fait money as they currently are. Networks like Visa are far more efficient than cryptocurrency mining (which, if you weren't aware, is running the payment network). 

In cryptocurrency mining, you essentially get paid some of the same coin for supporting that coin's network. If you mine Ethereum, you're basically part of the ETH ledger. That is, unless you use a service like Nicehash, in which you get paid in BTC, not whatever coin the particular algorithm you're running at the moment is attached to. When mining blew up, the difficulty value increased, meaning everyone got less of a reward for the amount of "work" they were doing. It had to, otherwise everyone would have too much of the coin, and it would collapse and become worthless, or they would start running into problems with running out of the coins (there can only exist 21 million bitcoins in total). Either way, something bad would happen, so difficulty goes up. That means it requires more energy to run the network supporting it, so the more miners there are, the less efficient the network gets. 

Visa et al. doesn't have that problem. There's nothing artificially inflating the cost of running the network like there is with cryptocurrency. For cryptocurrencies to be a true viable option to be used like fiat is today, it has to be redesigned for the ground up. Cryptocurrencies exploded because a bunch of miners showed up when they realized they could make money by doing it, which in turn is ironically making them a worse option because of the flaw explained in this post.


----------



## quirky (Apr 20, 2018)

So many mixed opinions I honestly don't know what to do. But some of you that said that "the boat has already sailed" might be right. I also think I am a bit late to the party, I should keep myself more informed when it comes to innovations. But now I know that! To those who said "if you are nervous for an asset don't" I am nervous because I haven't done it before and because I don't have money laying around that I can freely invest without taking care of the consequences. If I will invest it would be to earn more and not just to lose my money.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 20, 2018)

quirky.. Bitcoin has gone up from $6500 dollars to $8500 dollars in the last couple of weeks.. pretty much in the time this "i dont know what to do" thread has been running.. 

i am gonna make a prediction.. in a months time when its at $10500 you are gonna look back and regret not jumping in.. you are then gonna think its "too late" and not bother..

but as i always say.. i could be wrong.. time will tell.. he he

trog


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 20, 2018)

quirky said:


> I don't have money laying around that I can freely invest without taking care of the consequences.



Then you should not invest in anything, let alone crypto.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 20, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money *I will stress out*. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?


Steve Wozniak Sold All His Bitcoin: Bought It At $700


> Wozniak said he bought bitcoin as an experiment. But he dumped the cryptocurrency because *he did not want to worry* about its erratic price movements.






trog100 said:


> i am gonna make a prediction.. in a months time when its at $10500 you are gonna look back and regret not jumping in.. you are then gonna think its "too late" and not bother..


Based on what markers?  This looks like a gamble to me, not a prediction.  The only reasonable explanation for the surge is the volatility in global markets (US-China trade war and escalation of Syrian conflict).  What BTC does is going to hinge on economic reports in the coming weeks.  If the global economy is mostly unaffected by the aforementioned events then BTC will dive again.  If the global economy looks like we're heading for another global recession, then BTC could surge.  Either way, it's a gamble. Investments usually are.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 20, 2018)

I Enjoy Reading "Our Troggs Optimism"



> optimism
> ˈɒptɪmɪz(ə)m/
> _noun_
> noun: *optimism*
> ...


----------



## trog100 (Apr 21, 2018)

i have to be optimistic dorset.. all in all including mining hardware i have about £11000 invested in crypto..

i am not optimistic by nature and i am not a gambler ether.. but i made a decision last year and watched bitcoin go from 4K when i started to near 20K.. this year i have watched it drop down to 6.5K..

now i see the downward trend reversing and a new upwards trend beginning.. i have no reason to believe that upward trend now its started (admittedly a bit late) wont do the same this year has it did last year..

nothing is for sure and i do admit to getting a bit worried but things are looking much better now in the crypto world.. he he..

i predict.. 10.5K within the next month and then on upwards..

trog

ps.. as i speak.. or just after.. my 10.5k in a month was probably pessimistic.. he he


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 21, 2018)

What started this alleged recovery was a $1000 surge (7%) that took place in 45 minutes. Your chart shows a $200 surge and a $300 surge in a similar timeframe. That's not reassuring; that's concerning.  If these trades are legitimate, they are in the billions of dollars.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> What started this alleged recovery was a $1000 surge (7%) that took place in 45 minutes. Your chart shows a $200 surge and a $300 surge in a similar timeframe. That's not reassuring; that's concerning.  If these trades are legitimate, they are in the billions of dollars.



Why is it concerning?


----------



## trog100 (Apr 21, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> What started this alleged recovery was a $1000 surge (7%) that took place in 45 minutes. Your chart shows a $200 surge and a $300 surge in a similar timeframe. That's not reassuring; that's concerning.  If these trades are legitimate, they are in the billions of dollars.



its reassuring if you are looking for signs an up-trend in crypto prices (me) not reassuring if you are not (you).. 

the chart looks even more impressive this morning.. there will probably be a small profit taking sell off as it hits 9K or close.. then it will resume its new upward trend.. 

how big the 9K sell of is will tell the story.. 






trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 21, 2018)

The rise to 9000 looks normal, the rise between 6500-8800 looks manipulated.  In other words, it's going to crash hard again.  It's just a matter of when the manipulators decide to cash out.  The people that bought between $8800 and $9000 are going to get swindled (again) by the people that bought $6500-8800.  Remember this: New Study Links Price Manipulation to Bitcoin's Insane Surge


> Is it possible that suspicious activity from just one person could have caused a 566% surge in the price of bitcoin? Well, according to a new study published in the Journal of Monetary Economics, the answer to that question is a resounding “yes.”





> During both periods, the *USD-BTC exchange rate rose by an average of four percent* on days when suspicious trades took place, compared to a slight decline on days without suspicious activity.”





> In the particular instances that the team studied, two bots were able to perform valid trades with bitcoins that they did not actually own, making off with millions and manipulating the price of BTC in the process.


Fun fact: the $8500 to $8800 bump was 3.5%.

This isn't the thread for this kind of discussion anyway.


----------



## mroofie (Apr 21, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?
> 
> PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.



Only way cryptocurrency becomes mainstream is via a government version of bitcoin.

A new example coin needs to be created


----------



## hat (Apr 22, 2018)

mroofie said:


> Only way cryptocurrency becomes mainstream is via a government version of bitcoin.
> 
> A new example coin needs to be created


You're probably right; however, I remind you not everyone trades strictly in government created currencies. In the old days people used to use the barter system, trading whatever goods they obtained or made themselves for whatever they wanted that somebody else had. I wouldn't exactly call that a government created currency. That said, if crypto were to become mainstream via government, they (the government) would likely have to create and control their own cryptocurrency, as you said. Then the same problem exists... it would probably take too much energy to maintain. They would need miners to run the payment network. The more people who are using it, the more miners you need, otherwise transactions take too long. The more miners you have, the harder it is to mine anything. That is, with cryptocurrency in its current state. I'd imagine they could create one that doesn't have a difficulty value, or rewards generated by mining, where miners literally just run the payment network, and nothing else. If you do that, though, then you're basically re-creating a payment network like Visa, just with a new government sponsored currency behind it. That seems counter-intuitive, as you now have a new currency you're trying to push when USD is already widely accepted and supported. No reason to do that.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 22, 2018)

people tend to forget that the US Dollar is under severe threat.. its value is not written in stone ..

change may have to come whether its wanted or not.. most of the anti crypto stuff seems to be based us having a secure financial system in place as we are.. the problem is the current worlds financial system and its fiat currencies are far from secure..

gold is the traditional safe haven retreat but some people see bitcoin as a digital alternative.. the stock market and bonds are not secure.. again some people predict a fairly hefty price reset (crash) coming..

something for sure is coming.. i aint entirely sure what but something has to change.. the current system we all rely on is not sustainable for much longer.. adding more debt with no possibility of ever paying it back only works for so long..

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 22, 2018)

hat said:


> You're probably right; however, I remind you not everyone trades strictly in government created currencies. In the old days people used to use the barter system, trading whatever goods they obtained or made themselves for whatever they wanted that somebody else had. I wouldn't exactly call that a government created currency. That said, if crypto were to become mainstream via government, they (the government) would likely have to create and control their own cryptocurrency, as you said. Then the same problem exists... it would probably take too much energy to maintain. They would need miners to run the payment network. The more people who are using it, the more miners you need, otherwise transactions take too long. The more miners you have, the harder it is to mine anything. That is, with cryptocurrency in its current state. I'd imagine they could create one that doesn't have a difficulty value, or rewards generated by mining, where miners literally just run the payment network, and nothing else. If you do that, though, then you're basically re-creating a payment network like Visa, just with a new government sponsored currency behind it. That seems counter-intuitive, as you now have a new currency you're trying to push when USD is already widely accepted and supported. No reason to do that.


And any currency is only as good as the body (government or developers) controlling it and the economy supporting it.  There will never be a perfect currency.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 24, 2018)

things are looking pretty good for only an "alleged" recovery ford..  i wonder what a real one would look like in your eyes.. he he

$9443 and still rising.. eth is at $708.. up over 40% over the last seven days.. 

and whoopy whoopy in crypto terms i am about 5K US richer than i was two weeks ago.. 






trog


----------



## Papahyooie (Apr 24, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> And any currency is only as good as the body (government or developers) controlling it and the economy supporting it.  There will never be a perfect currency.



That's exactly the point of crypto. The open ones like BTC at least. The controlling body is literally everyone; It's the people who participate. The buyers, sellers, and miners. That causes volatility, yes. It also provides strength to weather any storm, at least that doesn't destroy the platform and/or the internet. The missing piece with crypto taking over is simply that... it has to take over. Businesses have to start accepting it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 24, 2018)

The controlling body is the people that wrote the software.  Right now, that's Wladimir J. van der Laan for Bitcoin.  Also nothing to stop forks like Bitcoin Cash.  Remember Kazaa (example of a peer-to-peer network)?  Bitcoin is fundamentally the same.  Who uses Kazaa anymore?

Businesses won't accept it because it is volatile and not guaranteed (lots of fraud) nor insured (FDIC/NUCA) in any way.  Only places cryptocurrencies are preferable to fiat is in places like Venezuela where the official currency is suffering severe inflation.

The proof of work model is doomed to fail because of the astronomical cost associated with its maintenance.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 24, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> The missing piece with crypto taking over is simply that... it has to take over. Businesses have to start accepting it.



Crypto will become mainstream when Businesses have to start accepting it.   and your Average mom & pop corner store use it
Hell even that great american Institution Called Hollywood avoids it like its a Hooker with the Clap
Just tell me of the last 100 or so films released used Crypto Currency as part of the Script/plot  
Tv is much the same
even trogg will be hard pressed to name 2  ( i myself cannot even think of one  its almost always $$$$$$$


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 25, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The controlling body is the people that wrote the software.



That power can and has been taken from them in the past though (look at the bitcoin digital signature history for some fun) so no, not really.


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 25, 2018)

Crypto replacing fiat is currently like renewable energy replacing fossil fuels.  There are alternatives in place but there are adoption barriers in place that need to be overcome before any significant chance of either taking over.  Namely, the current iterations don't appear to be ready for prime time but they are not exactly far away.

EDIT: Although renewables are ready for prime time they can just be prohibitively expensive.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 25, 2018)

i havnt a clue what part crypto will play in the future.. i just know the price of bitcoin is now at $9555 and steadily moving higher.. i dont think i have seen such steady upwards climb over a full 24 hour period.. there is bound to be bit of a profit taking sell off at some point.. i am gonna guess $10,000.. then it will dip a little.. maybe back down to $9500.. and then back up again.. 

i am trying to predict the unpredictable but i aint doing a bad job so far.. he he

trog


----------



## nothappy (Apr 25, 2018)

the rules are :
1. Invest what you can lose
and that is it...

Remember when we had to go to the mall or shopping center to get stuff? now we buy direct by apps / online. Remember yellow cabs (or whatever color taxi's are in your part of the world), now we get UBER. These "Distruptive" technologies are full of suprises cause there is the old and the new, but we find ballance in the end. Jodie foster was asked what she was going to ask the aliens she said ""How did you do it" (Contact 1997).

What she meant is how did the aliens survive the adolescence of technology, how we are now in a tech puberty, we got weapons to destroy ourselves and tech to enrich ourselves. Crypto is the equivalent of the EURO currency in europe, but on a global scale, a Singular currency which is safe from tampering (remember they hacked the market place, never the currency).

Visa might be a good concept, but here is a goood alternative, and we just have to wait for this alternative become regulated (it will, not just a dream). ANYTHING is worth something if there are people wishing to acquire them, money is just a good media to exchange (remember we use to BARTER before we use money). You want Crypto to be valuable? make it so that people want to buy it (Applicable for anything actually). Have fun!


----------



## quirky (Apr 25, 2018)

I have some savings that I prepared for investments in cryptocurrencies or I was thinking of doing the interest rate scheme and deposit my money which seems more secure to me. So, I did a lot of research, watched a few videos, went through articles and stuff, and I think I got a pretty good idea of all the things that should be taken into account before investing in Bitcoin. Currently, I can invest 2k and I was thinking investing half of them just in case something goes wrong... I don't want to blow them all at once. Do you think that it's a good idea or I should save a bit more and then do the investment? 



moproblems99 said:


> Then you should not invest in anything, let alone crypto.


I mean, I have savings but I just want to be extra careful before doing something. I worked very hard to save them, and this will be my first try, so I think it is okay to have some doubts! I don't think that just because I want to be careful about my investment and do as much research as possible I shouldn't invest at all.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 25, 2018)

Just keep in mind no matter how you try to justify it, this is a high risk investment category.  There can be no guarantees.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 25, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i havnt a clue what part crypto will play in the future.. i just know the price of bitcoin is now at $9555 and steadily moving higher.. i dont think i have seen such steady upwards climb over a full 24 hour period.. there is bound to be bit of a profit taking sell off at some point.. i am gonna guess $10,000.. then it will dip a little.. maybe back down to $9500.. and then back up again..
> 
> i am trying to predict the unpredictable but i aint doing a bad job so far.. he he
> 
> trog


Suspicious trades caused it to rise from $6500 to $8800 (35%).  When they bail, it will likely fall by 35% to $6210.75 (based on $9550 price).


----------



## trog100 (Apr 25, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Suspicious trades caused it to rise from $6500 to $8800 (35%).  When they bail, it will likely fall by 35% to $6210.75 (based on $9550 price).



its all unpredictable.. but its the trend that matters.. traders play trading games.. sell at what they predict (program in) as a high and buy on the dips.. when they think the current trend is up they buy on the dip.. when they think its down they hold back.. but big money can manipulate the scene.. i still think that big money wants it to go higher.. which suits me cos so do i.. 

trog


----------



## Papahyooie (Apr 25, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The controlling body is the people that wrote the software.  Right now, that's Wladimir J. van der Laan for Bitcoin.  Also nothing to stop forks like Bitcoin Cash.  Remember Kazaa (example of a peer-to-peer network)?  Bitcoin is fundamentally the same.  Who uses Kazaa anymore?



That's a base misunderstanding of how these networks work. Being a distributed network, the software writer no longer controls the network at all, once it is released. Sure, they can fork, but the ultimate determination of what is used is determined by those that mine, and those that buy and sell. If Bitcoin forks, and nobody adopts the forked code, then that fork dies.


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 25, 2018)

quirky said:


> I have some savings that I prepared for investments in cryptocurrencies or I was thinking of doing the interest rate scheme and deposit my money which seems more secure to me. So, I did a lot of research, watched a few videos, went through articles and stuff, and I think I got a pretty good idea of all the things that should be taken into account before investing in Bitcoin. Currently, I can invest 2k and I was thinking investing half of them just in case something goes wrong... I don't want to blow them all at once. Do you think that it's a good idea or I should save a bit more and then do the investment?
> 
> 
> I mean, I have savings but I just want to be extra careful before doing something. I worked very hard to save them, and this will be my first try, so I think it is okay to have some doubts! I don't think that just because I want to be careful about my investment and do as much research as possible I shouldn't invest at all.



Honestly, I understand you having doubts.  But with crypto, the best way to put it, you need to have faith.  Crypto can have very large swings.  If you act on your doubts then you are likely to lose a large portion of what you invest.  You need to be able to ignore your doubts.  Seeing as how it took you a long time to save this money, I don't see you being able to ignore your doubts.

I still suggest to not invest in crypto.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Apr 26, 2018)

quirky said:


> I have some savings that I prepared for investments in cryptocurrencies or I was thinking of doing the interest rate scheme and deposit my money which seems more secure to me. So, I did a lot of research, watched a few videos, went through articles and stuff, and I think I got a pretty good idea of all the things that should be taken into account before investing in Bitcoin. Currently, I can invest 2k and I was thinking investing half of them just in case something goes wrong... I don't want to blow them all at once. Do you think that it's a good idea or I should save a bit more and then do the investment?
> 
> 
> I mean, I have savings but I just want to be extra careful before doing something. I worked very hard to save them, and this will be my first try, so I think it is okay to have some doubts! I don't think that just because I want to be careful about my investment and do as much research as possible I shouldn't invest at all.




as long as you can watch it possibly go to zero and be ok with that, have at it.

i suggest dollar cost averaging in, ie buy $200 one day, $200 a few days later, and so on. this will average out your cost as btc is very volitile (to say the least) and trying to time it for the lowest entry price is a mugs game.

maybe only spend half your savings on it, keep the rest as a reserve until you see where its going.

heres a suggestion.. DONT watch the price every day, check it once a week, maybe every 2 weeks. better yet, once a month or so. it will save a lot of grief as the price wanders around. its up.. its down.. its waaaay down.. no its back up, now way up. its a fun ride actually.

be prepared for your investment to possibly lose value, possibly right at the start, but dont worry about it (you did kiss it goodbye right?). btc is a long term thing. it usually comes back but it can be a long drawn out decline before coming back up

one thing you havent mentioned.. what wallet are you going to use? the bitcoin core wallet is the standard and allows passphrase protection, and you control the private keys, not some third party.. i *highly* suggest not leaving it on an exchange, many exchanges have been hacked and gone under, taking your coins with them.

if you use the core wallet, make sure to back up the wallet.dat file, that is the file with the private keys.

if you need help give a holler. but be aware that the wallet.dat file should never be sent to anyone, and ideally you want several backups, at least one off site.

i use a trezor hardware wallet its about $150 or so its the safest way to keep you btc. up to you if you think its worth the price to keep a grand or two safer.

BTW ive been in btc since 2011, best investment ever.. but of course that doesnt mean anything as far as future performance.


----------



## ppn (Apr 26, 2018)

Yeah, all crypto does is serve as a placeholder for your money and create a perceived value of the common wealth represented in graphs. The more people invest the more it goes up, but there is this thing called profit taking, and once people take out of the system if falls back to lower value, but not as much, so it can never really grow unless 100 times more people invest than those who withdrawal. but then again their money is no longer there, 99% of it has been taken as profit. All you can see is some pretty graphs go up and down, but your hair only goes white, never the reverse.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 26, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i havnt a clue what part crypto will play in the future.. i just know the price of bitcoin is now at $9555 and steadily moving higher.. i dont think i have seen such steady upwards climb over a full 24 hour period.. there is bound to be bit of a profit taking sell off at some point.. i am gonna guess $10,000.. then it will dip a little.. maybe back down to $9500.. and then back up again..
> 
> i am trying to predict the unpredictable but i aint doing a bad job so far.. he he
> 
> trog



Lol you don't predict anything you just look at a chart and pray for the best outcome. Not a day goes by without you adjusting what you're 'predicting' in one way or the other. You're applying short term investment logic to a long term investment. Its painful to read. But I get it, since you splashed 11k into a bottomless pit basically you don't have any other options right now.

To me you are a perfect example of why this is one of the worst investments right now that one can possibly make. Its probably bad for your health, too.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 26, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Lol you don't predict anything you just look at a chart and pray for the best outcome. Not a day goes by without you adjusting what you're 'predicting' in one way or the other. You're applying short term investment logic to a long term investment. Its painful to read. But I get it, since you splashed 11k into a bottomless pit basically you don't have any other options right now.
> 
> To me you are a perfect example of why this is one of the worst investments right now that one can possibly make. Its probably bad for your health, too.



he he.. the negatives are out in force today.. all talking the usual nonsense.. 

ether way i was wrong.. the high didnt go as high as i expected and low went lower... 

in crypto terms i am now about a £1000 quid poorer than i was yesterday.. i am in this long term by the way.. and i "predict" long tern the only way is up.. he he..

my 10 x 1070 mining cards are now showing about $15 dollars per day.. not a lot.. but better than the $9 dollars they were showing a couple of weeks back.. 

trog


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 26, 2018)

trog100 said:


> he he.. the negatives are out in force today.. all talking the usual nonsense..
> 
> ether way i was wrong.. the high didnt go as high as i expected and low went lower...



Its quite fun to read too... First, you say 'the usual nonsense' and only one sentence later you're adjusting your earlier predictions, confirming exactly what I've said


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 26, 2018)

So one of those manipulative spikes cashed out? 

Cryptocurrency is a toy for billionaires.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 26, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Its quite fun to read too... First, you say 'the usual nonsense' and only one sentence later you're adjusting your earlier predictions, confirming exactly what I've said



If any investment vehicle were easy to predict, everyone would be rich.  That doesn’t happen, because it can’t.


----------



## trog100 (Apr 26, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> So one of those manipulative spikes cashed out?
> 
> Cryptocurrency is a toy for billionaires.



maybe.. but the significant fact and recon by now even you will know its a fact and not simply alleged is that the down trend we have been seeing over the last couple or so months has turned..

we are up from $6500 to $8888 as i write.. a positive up trend is now the norm.. i did say $10,000 within a month and i am gonna stick with that..

trog

ps.. a possible or more likely probable explanation for yesterdays sudden fall back in the bitcoin price.. and my "prediction" error.. he he

https://altcointoday.com/more-than-140-million-in-bitcoin-moved-from-mt-gox-wallets/


----------



## Xuper (May 1, 2018)

I Invested in crypto and have now $8200.trading in crypto needs to be clever , well informed , Checking every news, even best trader can't predict upward price.trading in crypto is extremely dangerous for beginner.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> So one of those manipulative spikes cashed out?
> 
> Cryptocurrency is a toy for billionaires.



You're just pessimistic. It isn't a toy for billionaires, It's a toy for clever people. I cashed out what I had the other day at $9500. Made a cool 600 bucks for nothing but watching and waiting. Could have waited to see if it went up further, but I knew if it got anywhere near 10k there'd be a huge sell-off, so I sacrificed a little profit potential in order to take what I had and run. Beat them to the punch. Luckily, I called it right this time. Hasn't always happened that way, but I've never lost more than I've won. And at this point, I've cashed out well over 10x what I originally invested, so there is no risk whatsoever. I reinvest some profits into mining hardware to hedge against crypto falling, and so I'm still making money for literally sitting here. 

Call it a toy for billionaires all you want, but money is money, whether it's 10 bucks or a billion. I can agree with you about disparaging people who rolled their 401k's into crypto, and who knows about the long term... but to write crypto off completely as you have is just as dumb.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 1, 2018)

How did Bill Gates and Warren Buffett make their billions?  Playing markets.  Your account may be missing a lot of zeros compared to them but you're still playing in their playground.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> How did Bill Gates and Warren Buffett make their billions?  Playing markets.  Your account may be missing a lot of zeros compared to them but you're still playing in their playground.



So your solution is to never go to the playground rather than go to play with their super nice toys, even if if you get to play with them less?

I mean, that's fine with me, I couldn't care less what you do. I just find it funny that you sure spend a lot of time peeking over the fence and grumbling about the playground when the gate's open.

I just bought a house, and crypto profits paid for a lot of the expenses involved. (not the house itself, I'm not THAT kind of investor, unfortunately... but inspection fees, closing costs, etc.) So you continue peeking your nose into our playground while refusing to come in. I'll continue to laugh at you from the merry-go-round.


----------



## Vya Domus (May 1, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> So your solution is to never go to the playground rather than go to play with their super nice toys, even if if you get to play with them less?



You can go, sure, but it will likely amount to nothing most of the time.



Papahyooie said:


> It's a toy for clever people.



I'm curios , what is it that makes this a toy for clever people ?


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You can go, sure, but it will likely amount to nothing most of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm curios , what is it that makes this a toy for clever people ?


If it amounts to nothing for you then your not doing it right , simples.

And the same applies to your second point though i think its for anyone personally not just the clever,,but if your not clever with your money you Will loose it, but that applies to life as a whole.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 1, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> So your solution is to never go to the playground rather than go to play with their super nice toys, even if if you get to play with them less?
> 
> I mean, that's fine with me, I couldn't care less what you do. I just find it funny that you sure spend a lot of time peeking over the fence and grumbling about the playground when the gate's open.
> 
> I just bought a house, and crypto profits paid for a lot of the expenses involved. (not the house itself, I'm not THAT kind of investor, unfortunately... but inspection fees, closing costs, etc.) So you continue peeking your nose into our playground while refusing to come in. I'll continue to laugh at you from the merry-go-round.


I don't have a problem when the playground has overseers that make sure everyone plays fair.  Cryptocurrencies are an unregulated market: enforcement is reactionary rather than proactive.  Additionally, markets like NYSE are the size of theme parks rather than playgrounds: you can spend days at a theme park and never encounter someone specific that you know is there; playground, not so much.

To put it into context: Jeff Bezos, by himself (net worth over $100 billion), could buyout two-thirds of BTC ($160 billion market cap).  For all the noise it makes, it really is a small thing and there's numerous factors at play that will prevent it from ever becoming big.


Back to the OP: "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" No, I do not.  Peer to peer is terribly inefficient.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I don't have a problem when the playground has overseers that make sure everyone plays fair.  Cryptocurrencies are an unregulated market: enforcement is reactionary rather than proactive.  Additionally, markets like NYSE are the size of theme parks rather than playgrounds: you can spend days at a theme park and never encounter someone specific that you know is there; playground, not so much.
> 
> To put it into context: Jeff Bezos, by himself (net worth over $100 billion), could buyout two-thirds of BTC ($160 billion market cap).


he could also buy most of africa and possibly all of russia, ie the guys rich and could buy a lot so as context goes i think that point moot personally since there are a few that could buy at that level just like nvidia or intel Could just buy Amd ,,but dont.
I get and agree with your grrr towards the unregulated side of the crypto coin but thats part of being a fledgling market and will be corrected in time, wherein they become more legit and worth more.
so they'll live on, as is ,who knows but i doubt it but crypto is'nt going anywhere soon , you yourself, should by now be realising, that a few peoples scorn just is'nt enough to kill it.


Also fundamentally Crypto was born because All those regulators and regulations were put on fiats toes by the rich to make the rich richer.

what with shorting stock and what not they game real life shit that actually matters, note a company recently trying to shut AMD down to make a quick quid , so to me your ideology of regulation is miss-placed , its created legitimate scum.


----------



## Vya Domus (May 1, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> And the same applies to your second point though i think its for anyone personally not just the clever,,but if your not clever with your money you Will loose it, but that applies to life as a whole.



I just found that claim rather strange , as if there are things out there that can't be manipulated to the point of making the whole thing crashes into flames , which is what *FordGT90Concept* is trying to say.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> I just find that claim rather strange , as if there are things out there that can't be manipulated to the point of making the whole thing crash into flames , which is what *FordGT90Concept* is trying to say.


soo i did'nt say there was'nt or imply there was'nt or mention such things, most everything can and is manipulated , regardless of regulation though. 
I agree crypto is being manipulated but so is fiat , the markets most economies and most elections now too and if your a tin hat kinda guy even the people.
So what, thats not killing off crypto either , though regulation might, I just cant see it personally.
and it was an opinion and a reasonably logically right one at that , if your not good with money and it flies easily from your hand , you are unlikely to gain from crypto investments.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> You can go, sure, but it will likely amount to nothing most of the time.
> I'm curios , what is it that makes this a toy for clever people ?



It's a toy for clever people, *rather* than only rich people, as Ford says. That's my point. I say it's a toy for clever people, because a fool and his money are soon parted. A clever person on the other hand, who can read the signs and doesn't get caught up in greed and hype, can make lots of money. I say that in contrast to Ford's assertion that it's a rich man's playground, because I'm not rich, and yet I have made what I consider to be a great deal of money, at least a great deal when you consider that it was made doing absolutely nothing. Having more money to play with will make you more money, it's true... but if you're clever you can still make money with a small amount. I have never invested more than 250 dollars total in crypto. Everything else that I've made or re-invested was out of profit, so there's absolutely zero risk for me. On the other hand, if you have millions to invest, and you *aren't* clever... then you're probably going to lose it all. 

So it's not a toy for rich people. It's a toy for clever people. 



FordGT90Concept said:


> I don't have a problem when the playground has overseers that make sure everyone plays fair.  Cryptocurrencies are an unregulated market: enforcement is reactionary rather than proactive.  Additionally, markets like NYSE are the size of theme parks rather than playgrounds: you can spend days at a theme park and never encounter someone specific that you know is there; playground, not so much.
> To put it into context: Jeff Bezos, by himself (net worth over $100 billion), could buyout two-thirds of BTC ($160 billion market cap).  For all the noise it makes, it really is a small thing and there's numerous factors at play that will prevent it from ever becoming big.
> Back to the OP: "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" No, I do not.  Peer to peer is terribly inefficient.



I prefer the playgrounds where I can do what I want without a nanny yelling at me to follow the rules... Sure, the bigger kids can bully the smaller ones... but if they can't handle that, then they shouldn't come to this specific playground any more. There are plenty of playgrounds with nannies for you to go to. Go to them, and stay out of mine. And for god's sake, stop standing outside looking through the fence, and yelling about how terrible the playground is.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (May 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Additionally, markets like NYSE are the size of theme parks rather than playgrounds: you can spend days at a theme park and never encounter someone specific that you know is there; playground, not so much.
> 
> To put it into context: Jeff Bezos, by himself (net worth over $100 billion), could buyout two-thirds of BTC ($160 billion market cap).  For all the noise it makes, it really is a small thing and there's numerous factors at play that will prevent it from ever becoming big.



You make it sound like the stock market is so uncorruptible and pure...you have meet professional stock traders haven't you?  Yes there are laws in place to dissuade insider trading or pump and dump schemes...but they still happen All...The...Time. But luckily for the dishonest they have acquired a huge amount of cash and will likely never see the inside of a cell and if they do it is a white collar prison sentence. Their high paid lawyers will be sure of that.

If 1 person bought all the BTC guess how much BTC would be worth to the public? Nearly Zero and that would be the worst investment ever. But it might be cool cause then all the other cryptos would move up 1 rank.


----------



## Vya Domus (May 1, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> On the other hand, if you have millions to invest, and you *aren't* clever... then you're probably going to lose it all.



And that is unlikely to be the case, I am afraid your perception is slightly skewed.

As it turns out wealth is strongly related to intelligence/cleverness or whatever you would like to call it. Here's the thing , I would be willing to bet that someone with a bunch of millions would be far more successful that everyone else just on that detail alone and statistically I would be right a lot of the time. And you don't even need a lot of them to make it such that they account for the overwhelming majority of money that is moved about. The distributions for these sorts of things are always like that. If you want to make the case that you can make money even if you don't have millions then sure, I ain't going to argue with that but looking at the big picture this is undoubtedly a rich man's game , especially because of the almost nonexistent regulations.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> And that is unlikely to be the case, I am afraid your perception is slightly skewed.
> 
> As it turns out wealth is strongly related to intelligence/cleverness or whatever you would like to call it. Here's the thing , I would be willing to bet that someone with a bunch of millions would be far more successful that everyone else just on that detail alone and statistically I would be right a lot of the time. And you don't even need a lot of them to make it such that they account for the overwhelming majority of money that is moved about. The distributions for these sorts of things are always like that. If you want to make the case that you can make money even if you don't have millions then sure, I ain't going to argue with that but looking at the big picture this is undoubtedly a rich man's game , especially because of the almost nonexistent regulations.



That's my point exactly  ... wealth has nothing to do with it... It's the clever man who makes money, whether he had much money to start with or not.  Which is why I say it's a clever man's game, and not a rich man's game. The fact that wealth correlates with cleverness just supports my claim that wealth does not cause money to be made in crypto, but rather cleverness.

So... thanks for supporting my point, I guess?

Think of it this way.... 

A clever rich man will make money in crypto. 
A clever poor man will make money in crypto. 
A non-clever rich man will lose money in crypto. 
A non-clever poor man will lose money in crypto. 

These statements are all true, barring pure luck. So I postulate again... it's a clever man's game. Ford was saying it was a rich man's game, insinuating that a person who is not rich should not play. I beg to differ. Just because a rich clever man can make MORE money, does not mean a not-rich clever man can't make SOME money. 

So again I say... if you want to make money, go for it. If not, no skin off my back. I'm not trying to force anybody into my playground... Just stop being so annoying by staring at us sadly through the fence, and yelling about how our playground sucks.....


----------



## Vya Domus (May 1, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> That's my point exactly  ... wealth has nothing to do with it... It's the clever man who makes money, whether he had much money to start with or not.  Which is why I say it's a clever man's game, and not a rich man's game. The fact that wealth correlates with cleverness just supports my claim that wealth does not cause money to be made in crypto, but rather cleverness.
> 
> So... thanks for supporting my point, I guess?



This is why I said your perception is slightly skewed. You made a very clear distinction between being rich and being clever in your comments :



Papahyooie said:


> It's a toy for clever people, *rather* than only rich people,





Papahyooie said:


> So it's not a toy for rich people. It's a toy for clever people.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

Vya Domus said:


> This is why I said your perception is slightly skewed. You made a very clear distinction between being rich and being clever in your comments :


The distinction is Ford's, not mine. I never said one could not be clever AND rich. I am simply saying that one need not be rich to make money in crypto. One need only be clever.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 1, 2018)

Crypto*currency* isn't something that should be profitable to trade because inflation is a very bad thing yet, that's exactly what most people are in cryptocurrencies for: to profit off of inflation and "hodl" through deflation. Satoshi Nakamoto abandoned Bitcoin because it failed at its stated goal.



Papahyooie said:


> The distinction is Ford's, not mine. I never said one could not be clever AND rich. I am simply saying that one need not be rich to make money in crypto. One need only be clever.


That only holds true while inflation/deflation is cyclical.  To invest in cryptocurrencies at all is to bet on more inflation than deflation.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 1, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Crypto*currency* isn't something that should be profitable to trade because inflation is a very bad thing yet, that's exactly what most people are in cryptocurrencies for: to profit off of inflation and "hodl" through deflation. Satoshi Nakamoto abandoned Bitcoin because it failed at its stated goal.
> 
> 
> That only holds true while inflation/deflation is cyclical.  To invest in cryptocurrencies at all is to bet on more inflation than deflation.



To a point, I agree. I'd much rather crypto become what it was meant to be.. a truly unregulatable currency (and for that to happen, it must be useful as a currency... obviously it isn't...) I would trade all the money I've made off crypto for that to be true... but it isn't. And who knows if it ever will be? So I'll make money off it while I can.

As for my stance only being true while inflation/deflation is cyclical... yes... Also, water is wet.  Part of that "being clever" is knowing when to hold and when to fold. Hodling during a rise is for gamblers (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, until the house wins, and it will if you don't take your money and run....) Hodling during a downturn is only for those that missed the boat and hope it comes around again.


----------



## trog100 (May 2, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> To a point, I agree. I'd much rather crypto become what it was meant to be.. a truly unregulatable currency (and for that to happen, it must be useful as a currency... obviously it isn't...) I would trade all the money I've made off crypto for that to be true... but it isn't. And who knows if it ever will be? So I'll make money off it while I can.
> 
> As for my stance only being true while inflation/deflation is cyclical... yes... Also, water is wet.  Part of that "being clever" is knowing when to hold and when to fold. Hodling during a rise is for gamblers (which isn't necessarily a bad thing, until the house wins, and it will if you don't take your money and run....) Hodling during a downturn is only for those that missed the boat and hope it comes around again.



one word is missing here.. "lucky".. i hodle because i think the general future trend will be up... its impossible to figure out the ups and down along the way.. my little stash was at around 20K US its been down to around 7.5K US and its now at around 12K US.. i  never expected it would go as high as it did and never expected it would go as low as it did..

but i "expect" the future trend to be up.. i keep hodling.. i may be lucky or i may not.. 

trog


----------



## moproblems99 (May 2, 2018)

Honestly, for me, it started as an experiment as I wanted to learn about it.  Unexpected bills kinda pushed it in a direction I didn't intend but I saw a potential opportunity.  However, I lacked the time I really needed to be able to do what I needed.  Honestly, it has been really fun and if I lose a little bit then it is no big deal.  If I win a little bit, that would be cool too.


----------



## nothappy (May 2, 2018)

Necessity is the mother of all inventions, Just like FIAT became a necessity the current barter system tried to hold his ground. Now Crypto is a possible replacement and / or a great attachment, just need the world to adapt and come to a majority opinion that regulation is the answer. The necesity now is our financial sector is corrupt and being controlled by the few, and they make bad decisions (The big short, please see this movie). We need a new financial product / idea that the world can support and start a new, and crypto might be it.

This is a utopian idea, if the world is united then spaceships are going to be a reality. Because we will all have the same goal as to create a peacefull life, rather than this hoarding of wealth only felt by the less than one percent. Elon musk is making transportation in a better way, making planetary travel a reality, but because he had to do it alone he is taking too long. John F Kenedy became the beacon for the US to be able to land on the moon, Adolf Hitler became the Fuhrer of a country in europe that at one time held a hegemony over the world. let this be a rallying idea that helped the world unite and create safety and happiness to its inhabitants.

Sorry for the rant, watched infinity war and the idea that the resource of the universe is finite, and genocide might be just around the corner (global warming is a FACT), is making me wish for all to agree that we need new ideas for us to survive and thrive. I like the idea of CASH (FIAT), but we need to make it better (Crypto), and we need it since yesterday


----------



## Papahyooie (May 2, 2018)

trog100 said:


> one word is missing here.. "lucky".. i hodle because i think the general future trend will be up... its impossible to figure out the ups and down along the way.. my little stash was at around 20K US its been down to around 7.5K US and its now at around 12K US.. i  never expected it would go as high as it did and never expected it would go as low as it did..
> 
> but i "expect" the future trend to be up.. i keep hodling.. i may be lucky or i may not..
> 
> trog



The fact that you once had 20k and now have 12k is why I say it's a clever man's game. And hodling through everything is not clever, in my opinion. Until you sell, you have 0k. In fact, you have negative money, because you spent some to get crypto. So while crypto may indeed go up forever, it may indeed not. Take your profits while you can. Or, better yet, split your positions between long and short term. Take some profit while you have it, leave some in. Rinse, repeat. That will keep you making money against the possible crash, while also maintaining a future if it continues to rise.


----------



## trog100 (May 2, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> The fact that you once had 20k and now have 12k is why I say it's a clever man's game. And hodling through everything is not clever, in my opinion. Until you sell, you have 0k. In fact, you have negative money, because you spent some to get crypto. So while crypto may indeed go up forever, it may indeed not. Take your profits while you can. Or, better yet, split your positions between long and short term. Take some profit while you have it, leave some in. Rinse, repeat. That will keep you making money against the possible crash, while also maintaining a future if it continues to rise.



i tend to think crypto is money.. i dont go for the "you only have profit when you turn it in fiat theory"..  i do accept that if i had sold out at all time high 20K and bought back in at 7.5k low i would have made some nice dosh.. but i think its impossible to accurately guess when to buy and when to sell.. so i holdle through.. he he

trog


----------



## Papahyooie (May 2, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i tend to think crypto is money.. i dont go for the "you only have profit when you turn it in fiat theory"..  i do accept that if i had sold out at all time high 20K and bought back in at 7.5k low i would have made some nice dosh.. but i think its impossible to accurately guess when to buy and when to sell.. so i holdle through.. he he
> 
> trog


Crypto is money, sure... but at the moment at least, you can't really spend it. So it isn't money. I hope that changes, I honestly do. But at the moment, my point is that if crypto crashes to worthless tomorrow, you'd have $0, whereas if you had sold to dollars, you'd have $X. 

It isn't impossible to guess when to buy and when to sell. It follows the same rules as any other investment in the short term... just on a far faster time-table. For instance, as I said above... I sold some at 9500, because it was obvious that many were going to sell at 9999. The trick is, how much do you want to gamble on the chance that others won't sell before you? I'm not much of a gambler, so I sold at 9500. Gamblers would sell at 9999. Dreamers would hope for 10k (not that I don't hope for 10k... I just don't *bet* on it.) 

Learn how to read a depth chart, and it's easy as pie.


----------



## dorsetknob (May 2, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> It isn't impossible to guess when to buy and when to sell. It follows the same rules as any other investment


Buy low/Cheap Sell High/Dear them's the Rules you need to remember.
You Still have to (and for some its an  educated) guess when its as low or high as to suite your need either for buying or selling.

Note to Trogg
Tulips    at least those Bulbs rotted in the Fields and enriched the soil


----------



## Papahyooie (May 2, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> Buy low/Cheap Sell High/Dear them's the Rules you need to remember.
> You Still have to (and for some its an  educated) guess when its as low or high as to suite your need either for buying or selling.
> 
> Note to Trogg
> Tulips    at least those Bulbs rotted in the Fields and enriched the soil



Exactly. That's why I say learn to read the depth charts on the exchanges. That helps you predict the walls. If you're a gambler, get as close to the sell walls as you can before it either bounces off or climbs over. If you're not a gambler, sell/buy well before you hit the wall. Sometimes you get unlucky and make a bad call, but the more conservative you are, the more sure your profits are, which is why I say I'm not much of a gambler. Money now is better than no money later. A bird in hand, as it were.


----------



## trog100 (May 2, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Exactly. That's why I say learn to read the depth charts on the exchanges. That helps you predict the walls. If you're a gambler, get as close to the sell walls as you can before it either bounces off or climbs over. If you're not a gambler, sell/buy well before you hit the wall. Sometimes you get unlucky and make a bad call, but the more conservative you are, the more sure your profits are, which is why I say I'm not much of a gambler. Money now is better than no money later. A bird in hand, as it were.



well i recon i am pretty good at reading the charts i look at them on a regular basis.. but i will hodle on.. me no sell.. he he..

trog


----------



## Papahyooie (May 2, 2018)

trog100 said:


> well i recon i am pretty good at reading the charts i look at them on a regular basis.. but i will hodle on.. me no sell.. he he..
> 
> trog


You do you, brother. 

That's what I love about (at least the spirit behind) crypto. Open and free (as in speech.) I can sell, Trog can hodl, and we're all happy to do what we want. 

It's people that want to come into our playground with their nanny to tell us what to do that bother me.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 2, 2018)

You're playground is taking all the toys away from all of the other playgrounds so you're inevitably going to end up with unruly kids.   Cryptocurrency, overall, has done a lot more harm (energy consumption, another avenue for thefts, graphics card shortage/price inflation, improper use of warranty service) than good.


----------



## trog100 (May 2, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> You're playground is taking all the toys away from all of the other playgrounds so you're inevitably going to end up with unruly kids.   Cryptocurrency, overall, has done a lot more harm (energy consumption, another avenue for thefts, graphics card shortage/price inflation, improper use of warranty service) than good.



you are dredging the barrel ford.. not a lot else to say..

trog


----------



## MrGenius (May 3, 2018)

I don't know which I find more annoying. The usage of the nonsense word "whit" instead of "with", or the usage of the nonsense word "hodl" instead of "hold". You people find humor in that crap? Seriously?

So stupid.

So not in the least bit funny.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 3, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> I don't know which I find more annoying. The usage of the nonsense word "whit" instead of "with", or the usage of the nonsense word "hodl" instead of "hold". You people find humor in that crap? Seriously?
> 
> So stupid.
> 
> So not in the least bit funny.



I think you need a new bowl of Wheaties, someone shit in your other one.


----------



## quirky (May 4, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> Honestly, I understand you having doubts.  But with crypto, the best way to put it, you need to have faith.  Crypto can have very large swings.  If you act on your doubts then you are likely to lose a large portion of what you invest.  You need to be able to ignore your doubts.  Seeing as how it took you a long time to save this money, I don't see you being able to ignore your doubts.
> 
> I still suggest to not invest in crypto.


I am working on that. I think in time I will do it better and without overthinking whether it is worth it or no. At the end of the day, we cannot be sure about anything in life, so I have to learn to take chances and stop being in my head too much.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 4, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> You're playground is taking all the toys away from all of the other playgrounds so you're inevitably going to end up with unruly kids.   Cryptocurrency, overall, has done a lot more harm (energy consumption, another avenue for thefts, graphics card shortage/price inflation, improper use of warranty service) than good.



I've never taken anything from anyone. I've made consensual transactions to purchase goods and services that support my operation, yes. But I've taken nothing from anyone. If anyone else has done anything to harm you or anyone else, that's on them. It has nothing to do with me.


----------



## Vayra86 (May 4, 2018)

quirky said:


> I am working on that. I think in time I will do it better and without overthinking whether it is worth it or no. At the end of the day, we cannot be sure about anything in life, so I have to learn to take chances and stop being in my head too much.



Make it concrete - write up actual pro and con lists with tangible arguments for yourself - they help alot in "contemplating the if's"  A good add on to that is putting 1-3 pluses to each pro and 1-3 minuses to each con according to how you weigh them. If the bottom line is strongly positive, you know what to do 

Doing it like that helps taking out the emotional side of things, which is very much needed when it comes to investment. (Fear and doubt versus overconfidence and greed)


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 4, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> I've never taken anything from anyone. I've made consensual transactions to purchase goods and services that support my operation, yes. But I've taken nothing from anyone. If anyone else has done anything to harm you or anyone else, that's on them. It has nothing to do with me.


All transactions impact the market.  For example, the increase in power consumption could have increased rates to *all* customers that use the service so they can build more power plants to feed the demand.


----------



## dorsetknob (May 4, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> All transactions impact the market. For example, the increase in power consumption could have increased rates to *all* customers that use the service


This has already happened in Some Places/Community's
noted this in either this thread or the other one


----------



## hat (May 4, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> All transactions impact the market.  For example, the increase in power consumption could have increased rates to *all* customers that use the service so they can build more power plants to feed the demand.


Why is that his problem? We pay for our power. Blame the giant mining farms for that. Or anybody that does anything that requires electricity or any other resource.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 4, 2018)

Because power is often intrinsically tied to preventing heat stroke in the summer and hypothermia in the winter.  Power companies provide levelized rates to customers so that the neediest (e.g. people living in big old houses) aren't paying massive electric bills.  Realistically, miners should be charged business power rates which are much higher than residential, but they're not because the vast majority of miners out there aren't registered businesses.  The net effect is two fold:
1) miners add undue burden to the neediest by raising rates.
2) power companies are forced to add capacity that may vanish in a few years simply because cryptocurrency markets have fallen to a point it is no longer profitable.

#2 is especially bad because now the power provider is saddled with a multi million or billion dollar debt and no demand to pay for it.  Up goes surcharges which is a second slap in the face of #1.

Like I said before, very little positive comes out of cryptocurrency.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 4, 2018)

Once again... consensual transactions. If I get my power from a public grid, then sure... The public should be able to bar me from mining (as some have already done.) That's fair play. If I get my power from a private provider (which I do) then that's between myself and my provider. If the provider wishes to stop selling to me for mining, they can do so. 

See how that works? Consent. You on the other hand, want to tell me what I can and can't do, regardless of consent. Even if I provided my own power via solar or water, or whatever means, you'd find another way to justify invading my life. Statists gonna state.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2018)

Doesn't really matter what energy provider you use nor how it is structured because the Arkansas Public Service Commission has to approve it.  Utilities are heavily regulated to ensure everyone has access to what they need...at least on the residential level.

So...I dug up Entergy:
http://www.entergy-arkansas.com/your_home/tariffs.aspx

The residential service agreement:
http://www.entergy-arkansas.com/content/price/tariffs/eai_rs.pdf

Contains language: 


> This Rate Schedule is not applicable to commercial type use on the appurtenant premises such as chicken brooding and grain drying.  Where a portion of the residence premises (not separately metered) is used for nonresidential purposes, *the predominant use of the service*, as determined by the Company, shall determine the Rate Schedule applicable to all service.



That's where they draw the line.  If you're consuming more power to mine (should include cooling costs increased due to mining activity as well) than you are for living there, you should be billed under commercial rates.  If you should be but aren't, then it's basically theft.


US energy consumption has been trending down since cryptocurrencies were invented:
https://www.eia.gov/electricity/dat...echart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&pin=&rse=0&maptype=0

The likelihood of adding capacity to mine is virtually nonexistent at this time.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> people living in big old houses



So, what makes people living in a big, old house (i.e, inefficient) house needy and/or special?  Why should their choice to be inefficient be any different than my choice to be inefficient?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2018)

The house is often inherited and they can't afford renovations to make it more energy efficient (or move) due to living on a limited income.  It's far more common than you may think.  We're talking about shelter here; a necessity.  Cryptocurrency falls entirely under luxury.

Edit: To add, the power consumption of housing is very predictable based on ambient temperature.  It's something utilities can reliably project and compensate for.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 5, 2018)

It' still a choice.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Realistically, miners should be charged business power rates which are much higher than non-business



So, let's say I make $300 a month mining.  You say I should be charged business rates because I am effectively a business.  If I make the same $300 a month because I am online trading all day and happen to like my house extra warm and it just so happens I live an old, shitty (i.e, inefficient house) so I have a 1500 Watt heater running all day, should I still be charged like a business?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2018)

No, because heater power consumption is reliably associated with average temperature.

If you choose to heat your house by way of mining, I applaud you for that because you're actually doing work and heat is a beneficial byproduct of that.  There's serious potential in power companies selling/incentivizing cryptocurrency heaters.

On the other hand if you're mining through the hot months with your AC working against your miners, then yeah, this is business territory--not unlike a datacenter.

If you have so many miners that you're running the AC in the winter, there's no argument it isn't a business.

Dollar amounts don't matter to utilities, it's what you're using the power for that does.  If you're using 2 MWh/mo for yourself and your miners + cooling them is using 3 MWh/mo, then you're defrauding the utility because you're not paying business rates for business activity.


Back to my original point: why does business rates matter?  Because they aren't being subsidized/levelized.  Businesses pay for what they use.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 5, 2018)

Guess you missed the extra warm part...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2018)

Doesn't really change anything, does it?  Heating/cooling is pretty much assumed, even if behaviors are weird.  So is basic electric use to run appliances.  Running a blast furnace on your property? Business.  Running a grain drier on your property? Business.  Running a mining farm on your property? Business.

There's a caveat though: those regulations.  They make it very difficult for utilities to enforce business rates on a property zoned residential.  Just because a lot of miners get away with it doesn't make it legal nor ethical.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 5, 2018)

How do you know all that grain isn't for me?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 5, 2018)

They're talking these (minimum 1.3 MWh, usually propane/natural gas):






If you're running one of those, you're a farmer and farming is a business.


----------



## trog100 (May 5, 2018)

my little crypto stash is currently making me around $1400 a week richer (averaged over the last four weeks) ford.. on morality grounds do you recon i should give it all up..

the 2018 doldrums seem to be all over and i recon we have plain sailing ahead..  to the moon maybe.. he he

i think bitcoin will hit the £10000 mark today or maybe tomorrow.. but its eth that is doing the most.. up around %120 over the last four weeks.. 

trog

ps.. there maybe a message for quirky lurking here somewhere as well..


----------



## Papahyooie (May 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Doesn't really matter what energy provider you use nor how it is structured because the Arkansas Public Service Commission has to approve it.  Utilities are heavily regulated to ensure everyone has access to what they need...at least on the residential level.
> 
> So...I dug up Entergy:
> http://www.entergy-arkansas.com/your_home/tariffs.aspx
> ...



First off, Entergy has nothing to do with me, as I don't get my power from them. The company I do get my power from has a flat cap on the amount of energy you use, at which point the price goes up, until the next cap, at which point the price goes up again, etc.

I use far less energy than even the first cap level, even while mining. So once again, it's got nothing to do with me.

As for pollution, the company I get my energy from uses a mixture of solar and hydroelectric (mostly hydro of course) because Arkansas is awesome like that. Moreover, my natural gas usage didn't increase over the winter because of mining, which was pretty effectively heating my house. So... I actually saved the earth a very small bit. You're welcome.


----------



## moproblems99 (May 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> They're talking these (minimum 1.3 MWh, usually propane/natural gas):
> 
> If you're running one of those, you're a farmer and farming is a business.



I would like to go on record to say that I really like pancakes.  Do I have problem? Maybe...


----------



## yotano211 (May 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Because power is often intrinsically tied to preventing heat stroke in the summer and hypothermia in the winter.  Power companies provide levelized rates to customers so that the neediest (e.g. people living in big old houses) aren't paying massive electric bills.  Realistically, miners should be charged business power rates which are much higher than residential, but they're not because the vast majority of miners out there aren't registered businesses.  The net effect is two fold:
> 1) miners add undue burden to the neediest by raising rates.
> 2) power companies are forced to add capacity that may vanish in a few years simply because cryptocurrency markets have fallen to a point it is no longer profitable.
> 
> ...


Hope you know that around where I live business power rates are cheaper than residential. I have a registered business so I can easily call the local power company and get business rates.


----------



## R-T-B (May 30, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> Hope you know that around where I live business power rates are cheaper than residential. I have a registered business so I can easily call the local power company and get business rates.



Same here in "socialist" Washington.



moproblems99 said:


> I would like to go on record to say that I really like pancakes.  Do I have problem? Maybe...



To Ford's credit, there is a point though where consuming that much in a year would kill you.

I think you may have crossed it.


----------



## biffzinker (May 30, 2018)

Speaking of cryptocurrencies, Asus just announced this mothboard.

H370 Mining Master Motherboard
https://www.asus.com/us/News/ZwwO4E0EimUoYyEi

TPU news post: ASUS Intros H370 Mining Master Motherboard - Those Aren't USB Ports


----------



## R-T-B (May 30, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> Speaking of cryptocurrencies, Asus just announced this mothboard.
> 
> H370 Mining Master Motherboard
> 
> ...



I don't put much stock in the timing of motherboard anouncements to predict crypto trends.

Manufacturers have learned they can launch them at absolutely atrocious times, and since the market always bounces back, they know they can sit on the stock until people will buy it for a really inflated MSRP (thus making a huge profit).

That's probably what this board's launch is banking on.


----------



## hat (May 30, 2018)

Now there's a pretty neat board...


----------



## R-T-B (May 30, 2018)

hat said:


> Now there's a pretty neat board...



Agreed.  Was wondering how long it would take someone to just put one end of the simple usb risers everyone uses on the board.


----------



## trog100 (May 30, 2018)

summer is here and my mining rig had a move today.. out of my caravan where its sat since the end of last summer and upstairs into a spare bedroom.. it seems to have survived the shock.. he he

i had forgot how heavy the bloody thing is.. 

trog


----------



## hat (May 30, 2018)

You still running it, or storing it there while you wait for cooler weather again?



R-T-B said:


> Agreed.  Was wondering how long it would take someone to just put one end of the simple usb risers everyone uses on the board.



Yeah, seems neat and less cluttery. It's also a normal sized board, so it'll fit in most cases... 20 GPUs won't, but the board itself will at least.


----------



## R-T-B (May 30, 2018)

hat said:


> You still running it, or storing it there while you wait for cooler weather again?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, seems neat and less cluttery. It's also a normal sized board, so it'll fit in most cases... 20 GPUs won't, but the board itself will at least.



My is still running.  Just laying off the articles for now because interest is waning.

Not sure if you were asking me or the poster above me.


----------



## hat (May 30, 2018)

Was aking @trog100 that one... lol

If there was a new mining article, I'd give it a read.


----------



## yotano211 (May 30, 2018)

I shut my last one some weeks ago, and sold most of it. I have too much things going on to look after the rigs if one shuts off and they usually did.


----------



## trog100 (May 30, 2018)

hat said:


> Was aking @trog100 that one... lol
> 
> If there was a new mining article, I'd give it a read.



mine is still running... it runs itself and dosnt require any input from me.. it had to come out of the caravan.. time to use that for a few trips.. he he..

its not super hot here at the moment its currently running 68 C with the fans at 28%... plenty of spare cooling left.. 

trog


----------



## yotano211 (May 30, 2018)

trog100 said:


> mine is still running... it runs itself and dosnt require any input from me.. it had to come out of the caravan.. time to use that for a few trips.. he he..
> 
> its not super hot here at the moment its currently running 68 C with the fans at 28%... plenty of spare cooling left..
> 
> trog


whats a caravan, just asking.


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> whats a caravan, just asking.



It's like a trailer of some kind I'm assuming?  RV style?

Or it's a long string of camel-riding men crossing the desert, with miners in tow, laborers waving fans over them to keep them cool.

Do not recommend.


----------



## silkstone (May 31, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> I shut my last one some weeks ago, and sold most of it. I have too much things going on to look after the rigs if one shuts off and they usually did.



Were you not using automation scripts with your miners? My mining rig often stops, but then the script takes over and sorts it all out for me. No human interaction needed.


----------



## Outback Bronze (May 31, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> whats a caravan, just asking.



Here mate. Us Aussie's have heaps of em. We love travelling around Australia in them and Camping


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

silkstone said:


> Were you not using automation scripts with your miners? My mining rig often stops, but then the script takes over and sorts it all out for me. No human interaction needed.



In my gentoo rig, Systemd does this all for me too.  It's a blessing (the autorestart, mixed feelings on systemd itself).


----------



## yotano211 (May 31, 2018)

silkstone said:


> Were you not using automation scripts with your miners? My mining rig often stops, but then the script takes over and sorts it all out for me. No human interaction needed.


I was mining zcash with a unstable mining program. I had all rigs to auto everything but the main issue was the mining program


----------



## silkstone (May 31, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> I was mining zcash with a unstable mining program. I had all rigs to auto everything but the main issue was the mining program



There are scripts to monitor your mining programs too. For example, if your hashrate goes down, it can restart the computer. If a GPU stops it will restart the program, and so on.
The mining program I use isn't the most stable. I will crash 3-5 times a day, but it's always back up and running within 2 minutes with no user intervention.


----------



## StrayKAT (May 31, 2018)

It could be the future, but not without a lot of death and violence. This idea on the part of miners that it'll just happen casually is dumb as hell. Just look at those countries who tried to bypass the powers that be in their own way. For example, Libya.

Keyword: Power. Currency is not a thing in itself. It's a reflection/symbol of whoever is in power. And you don't simply take it away from them and magically say they don't matter.


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

As far as being "the future" I think anyone who is not dillusional recognizes the present cryptos for what they are:  beta products.

I think its safe to say both crypto and fiat will be with us for some time.


----------



## trog100 (May 31, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> whats a caravan, just asking.








in the UK its what we call one of these.. this one is parked somewhat precariously somewhere in scotland..  it dosnt get much winter use parked in my garden and it was handy to bung the miner in.. 

trog


----------



## StrayKAT (May 31, 2018)

I used to camp with one of those as a kid. But we call them trailers in the States.


----------



## EsaT (May 31, 2018)

Steevo said:


> No, it's based on a fundamentally flawed idea, with no physical force to enforce it's value.


And already course variations of current currencies can be huge problem for whole countries.
So something even more unstable and less rooted in anything real certainly isn't going to do mankind/society any favours.
Besides this cryptocurrency advancing environmetal crisis with its lot more than small resource consumption!



Outback Bronze said:


> Here mate. Us Aussie's have heaps of em. We love travelling around Australia in them and Camping
> 
> View attachment 101890


Same here in Finland at other side of globe...


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

StrayKAT said:


> It could be the future, but not without a lot of death and violence. This idea on the part of miners that it'll just happen casually is dumb as hell. Just look at those countries who tried to bypass the powers that be in their own way. For example, Libya.
> 
> Keyword: Power. Currency is not a thing in itself. It's a reflection/symbol of whoever is in power. And you don't simply take it away from them and magically say they don't matter.



That's the entire idea. Crypto being decentralized means that the people who run it hold the power over it. And who has more power than literally every single human being on the planet? (since all can participate.) 
Sure, governments can try to regulate, but at the end of the day, that hinges on people complying.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

I'd argue governments don't need to.  Cryptocurrency is not an expanding market.


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Cryptocurrency is not an expanding market.



I mean, it's not expanding so much now....   but didn't it just recently, uh, explode?

The general trend is upwards Ford.  No two ways about it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

Looks more or less like a flat line to me.



What happened at the end of last year was a bubble forming and bursting. What we see now is the new normal.  I quote myself:


FordGT90Concept said:


> Unless stock markets make a big move in either direction, I think crypto will remain more or less where it is until something happens.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Looks more or less like a flat line to me.



Are you blind?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

That's completely ignoring the bubble which changed the market forever.  Crypto bubble matches the dot-com bubble almost exactly:




Everyone was in a frenzy to buy dot-com shares because the sky was the ceiling.  Then reality struck that it is very difficult to monetize the internet.  Sounds familiar, doesn't it? History repeats.

This is what I see when taking in account the bubble (yellow represents the bubble anomaly):



The last leg of NASDAQ went up post dot-com burst because NASDAQ is intrinsically tied to GDP.  Cryptocurrency lacks that intrinsic link so the expected pattern is to trend stable or slightly down. "Elvis has left the building."


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

This is the only graph that matters:

My total USD valuation of owned cryptocurrency over the past month. (note that I have invested $0 USD in cryptocurrency in this time.)  

(And no, you can't see the numbers )


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

What's the X scale on it?


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> What's the X scale on it?



Does it matter? If it's in the cents, then I've gained cents. If it's in the thousands, I've gained thousands. The scale is even across the graph, I assure you.

I didn't put the scale on there on purpose.  I don't want the world to know how much money I have lol. OpSec.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

Because a month is a huge difference from a year.  Specifically, I want to know what caused those clear spikes.  Having a time frame would be able to establish the cause of them.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Because a month is a huge difference from a year.  Specifically, I want to know what caused those clear spikes.  Having a time frame would be able to establish the cause of them.



I gave you the time frame. The past month.

Over the year:





You'll see there are sharp drops, and of course you're going to say "See you lost money!" Which is sort of why I chose the month to month rather than the year, because I haven't withdrawn anything over the month.

The sharp drops are me withdrawing to pay bills and/or to avoid obvious impending drops in value, and/or to invest in more mining gear. Other, smaller drops, are either me withdrawing smaller amounts to avoid drops but still leaving most of it in to hedge my bet, or legitimate bad calls where I didn't jump ship early enough and had to weather the storm.

The only times I invested new cash is the first two spikes (and not all of that was new cash, the graph simply begins where I started using this particular service.)

Every other upward spike is either mining profits or me reinjecting cash that I had gained from selling out, or switching currencies. Another detail that might help you understand, is that graph also takes into account USD that I have on hand to invest. USD is treated as just another currency, so that is why my graph does not follow the graph of valuation of bitcoin. If I sell bitcoin, my USD valuation stays the same, so you see no dip. Then when I reinvest, and it goes up, you see the spike. 

Plus, you also have to take into account the fact that I have cashed out (and spent, never reinvested) more than 1000% what I have invested in cash USD.

The market can do what it wants, for all I care. Dips and spikes just make me more money.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

Oh, I'm blind about the month thing...

You're mostly talking about your personal up trend but you're also actively mining.  You'd have to weigh your up trend against the cost of electricity, labor, as well as estimate hardware wear and tear and I think that the up trend wouldn't be so up (flat or down even) post bubble burst.  Still in black ink, I'm sure, but market isn't growing.

Attrition will eventually make mining non-profitable except for those that can hugely decrease costs (e.g. hydropower) and increase productivity (e.g. ASIC farms).  They'll eventually carry the network and it's shrinking user base and sustain mostly through transaction fees.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Oh, I'm blind about the month thing...
> 
> You're mostly talking about your personal up trend but you're also actively mining.  You'd have to weigh your up trend against the cost of electricity, labor, as well as estimate hardware wear and tear and I think that the up trend wouldn't be so up (flat or down even) post bubble burst.



Of course I'm talking about my own personal valuation. That's my point... It's the only thing that matters, when it comes down to it. As long as there is money to be made, crypto will survive. And if you want to take a more nihilistic stand... take the money while you can. It's foolish to naysay while others are making money. 

Mining has actually netted me less profit than playing the market. That being said, it's a fair point that I have to weigh that against cost. Add up cost of electricity and wear and tear (I have ROI'd all of my mining investments already, and haven't lost a card yet because I sacrifice a little bit of hashing speed to keep my cards happy) and I make nearly 75% profit on the mining. That's insane for ANY investment, not to even speak of being "in black ink." 

Your claim about attrition, while true in the claim that attrition will cause the issues you say it will, is simply based on misinformation. The crypto userbase is growing, not shrinking. 

Regardless of all this, your claim that crypto is flat, if true, is a good thing. That means we're reaching stability, and leaving the boom/bust cycle. Stability leads to stable growth. At that point, I'll make less on playing the market, and more on mining. I'm ok with that, as mining is a far more stable income source.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Regardless of all this, your claim that crypto is flat, if true, is a good thing. That means we're reaching stability, and leaving the boom/bust cycle. Stability leads to stable growth. At that point, I'll make less on playing the market, and more on mining. I'm ok with that, as mining is a far more stable income source.


I doubt that is the case, again, because the market is so small.  It only takes one power play to send it all spiraling out of control again.  My hypothetical was based on the assumption there were no more power plays.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

Lol ok... so now you're saying that a "power play" will send it spiraling out of control again. The only "power play" there is in crypto, is buying a large amount to drive up the price, then selling it, and bank on the mania. Which is totally true, I give you that. But that just supports my conclusion that there is money to be made, and I'll go ahead and make it while you sit here naysaying. 

So which is it? Is crypto essentially flat, and therefore dead, or is crypto volatile and unstable, and therefore dead....  You can't have it both ways.


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Looks more or less like a flat line to me.
> View attachment 101901
> What happened at the end of last year was a bubble forming and bursting. What we see now is the new normal.  I quote myself:



Your X axis is horribly selected.  Crypto has been around (and thus, growing) far more than a year.


----------



## Space Lynx (May 31, 2018)

I haven't checked on crypto prices in over 3-4 months, feels great to not be apart of this world anymore. I feel bad now for low baller stock brokers on wall street ( not the big dawgs), I sort of understand now how it can kind of consume your entire life trying to keep up with it to maximize profits.

Regardless, glad I majored in Philosophy instead of Finance. I may never make much money, but the intellectual life is more than enough for me ~ long live Marcus Aurelius!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> So which is it? Is crypto essentially flat, and therefore dead, or is crypto volatile and unstable, and therefore dead....  You can't have it both ways.


Declining for the foreseeable future but can't rule out the possibility of another round of manipulation.  There may be another bubble in the future but it won't be as big.  Most people are familiar enough with the concept of cryptocurrencies to know the risks.  Ignorance drove the dot-com bubble and the cryptocurrency bubble.  In both cases, there was a specific example after the fact to point to and say, "this has happened before."  It tampers expectations greatly.



R-T-B said:


> Your X axis is horribly selected.  Crypto has been around (and thus, growing) far more than a year.


So was the dot-com industry.  Bubbles form when the public at large get ensnared in it.  That's exactly what happened to cryptocurrencies.  You could argue that dot-com bubble and burst took years rather than months.   I would retort that extreme volatility isn't in NASDAQ's nature like cryptocurrencies.  Money tends to move between shares rather than into and out of the market entirely like cryptocurrencies.


----------



## Papahyooie (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Declining for the foreseeable future but can't rule out the possibility of another round of manipulation.  There may be another bubble in the future but it won't be as big.  Most people are familiar enough with the concept of cryptocurrencies to know the risks.  Ignorance drove the dot-com bubble and the cryptocurrency bubble.  In both cases, there was a specific example after the fact to point to and say, "this has happened before."  It tampers expectations greatly.



"Declining for the foreseeable future" is not supported by any mathematical calculation whatsoever, that takes in appropriate scope. Today, it's up nearly 3%. For the week, it's up nearly 2%. It's down over the month, but as long as you're playing the market, you can still make a profit due to the rises and falls, AND moreover, it's up hundreds of percent for the hodlers. 
So nothing can ever be good about crypto no matter what it is, and nothing will ever convince you of it, ever. Gotcha.


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Declining for the foreseeable future



So you seem to say.

However you are hardly an unbiased individual, given your proclivity to latch onto to all the negative press that suits your opinion and ignore anything positive.

I think I can conclude this with reasonable certainty, unlike your claim:

Neither of us have any idea what the future holds.



Papahyooie said:


> So nothing can ever be good about crypto no matter what it is, and nothing will ever convince you of it, ever. Gotcha.



Pretty much.  In his mind positive news seems to be "market manipulation" and negative news the death toll for crypto.

I couldn't spin it harder if I tried.  I got to give him kudos.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (May 31, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> However you are hardly an unbiased individual, given your proclivity to latch onto to all the negative press that suits your opinion and ignore anything positive.


Hyperledger is gaining traction (IBM, Intel, etc. are supporting the initiative) but that's blockchain tech, not cryptocurrency (designed as an alternative to, in fact).


----------



## R-T-B (May 31, 2018)

> Hyperledger is gaining traction (IBM, Intel, etc. are supporting the initiative) but that's blockchain tech, not cryptocurrency (designed as an alternative to, in fact).



I'm not sure I agree with your definition of what is and isn't a cryptocurrency.  I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 1, 2018)

Hyperledger's goal is to not be a currency at all; it's to create a P2P trust network. Have a read. When you take away the enormous cost of the Proof-of-Work model, there's really no need for users to profit from the network itself.  The network replaces financial and logistics software so it ends up costing less.


> While most other blockchain projects focus on cryptocurrencies and tokens, the projects around Hyperledger demonstrate a strong potential to build the backbone of non-monetary, high scaling industrial applications of blockchain technology.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 3, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Hyperledger's goal is to not be a currency at all



Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that based on Stellar?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 3, 2018)

No, it's based on IBM Blockchain (modular) and Intel Sawtooth Lake (Proof of Elapsed Time).  The former supports currencies but doesn't require it.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 3, 2018)

Cryptocurrencies are nothing more than the latest branch on the "magical money-making inventions (not at all gambling, no sir, not at all)" tree on which the financial world lives. They're entirely valued through people's belief in their value, and when the people in question are fundamentally greedy and frightened bankers, it's all bound to go tumbling precipitously down once a significant enough number of them get scared.

Keep the FOMO at bay, you're not losing anything on not "investing" (read: gambling) your money on this utterly useless (seriously, literally useless) and massively wasteful and polluting circle jerk.


----------



## yotano211 (Jun 3, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Cryptocurrencies are nothing more than the latest branch on the "magical money-making inventions (not at all gambling, no sir, not at all)" tree on which the financial world lives. They're entirely valued through people's belief in their value, and when the people in question are fundamentally greedy and frightened bankers, it's all bound to go tumbling precipitously down once a significant enough number of them get scared.
> 
> Keep the FOMO at bay, you're not losing anything on not "investing" (read: gambling) your money on this utterly useless (seriously, literally useless) and massively wasteful and polluting circle jerk.


You're a little to late to the Cryptocurrency bashing party.


----------



## R0H1T (Jun 3, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Lol ok... so now you're saying that a "power play" will send it spiraling out of control again. *The only "power play" there is in crypto, is buying a large amount to drive up the price, then selling it, and bank on the mania*. Which is totally true, I give you that. But that just supports my conclusion that there is money to be made, and I'll go ahead and make it while you sit here naysaying.
> 
> So which is it? Is crypto essentially flat, and therefore dead, or is crypto volatile and unstable, and therefore dead....  You can't have it both ways.


Tbf that isn't the only way, large scale hacking theft or fake news are also *some of the other ways* crypto currencies can be manipulated. Not saying this doesn't happen to other asset classes but the freefall is arguably much worse in crypto.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 4, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> No, it's based on IBM Blockchain (modular) and Intel Sawtooth Lake (Proof of Elapsed Time).  The former supports currencies but doesn't require it.



I am pretty sure that IBM and Intel are backing Stellar.

http://fortune.com/2017/10/16/ibm-blockchain-stellar/


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 4, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Cryptocurrencies are nothing more than the latest branch on the "magical money-making inventions (not at all gambling, no sir, not at all)" tree on which the financial world lives. They're entirely valued through people's belief in their value, and when the people in question are fundamentally greedy and frightened bankers, it's all bound to go tumbling precipitously down once a significant enough number of them get scared.
> 
> Keep the FOMO at bay, you're not losing anything on not "investing" (read: gambling) your money on this utterly useless (seriously, literally useless) and massively wasteful and polluting circle jerk.



Gambling depends on dumb luck to win.

Crypto is not comparable that way.  If you do your research in crypto, the odds are in your favor to win.  Try "researching" a slot maching or RNG lootbox...  yeah, not going to happen, and probably will get you kicked out of the Casino.

As said, you are very late to the crypto bashing party.  The fact that your comment has upvotes shows how frothing at the mouth can be quite endearing to people who hate something, however.


----------



## Komshija (Jun 4, 2018)

Yes, there is certainly a massive hype about mining in the last 1,5 years. Many people are now selling their expensive hardware because they didn't achieve the expected results or, in most cases, didn't even return the investment. However, some people managed to earn something and return the investment, but their main "mining" hardware is also based on at least 12 GPU's. There is also a fair portion of luck, because if they significantly change the complexity for mining certain cryptocurrency, you are in trouble.

I didn't find the idea appealing because I calculated the hardware I need is way too expensive for my pocket: 2 x G4600, 16 GB DDR4 RAM (2x8 GB), 2 x Z170 MOBO with 7 PCI-e each, 14 x RX 480 or 580 8GB, 2 x cheapest 500 GB HDD 7200, 2 x 1200 W (at least) PSU 80 Plus Gold or better plus other neccessary stuff. Since there's no guarantee that I will return my investment in less than 18 months, I gave up the idea. It was a big gamble and I'm nowhere near being rich nor an upper-middle class person. So... yeah...


----------



## hat (Jun 4, 2018)

My investment was small (two 1070s, cost around $850 I think). Since I started maybe about 11 months ago, I'm sure I've at least recovered that much...

Even as things as they are now I'd like to expand. I actually thought of moving _both_ my 1070s to my Plex server once I can upgrade my main machine. In the meantime, I can rock my trusty old HD5870, until I can pop something more capable in, like a GTX1060 or whatever the next gen equivalent is.

One advantage to waiting for my crypto stash to grow enough until I'm able to buy new parts is time. I've got plenty of time to plan how I want to do this. In fact, I just learned recently that Plex doesn't support GPU encoding unless you have Plex Pass... so that kinda throws a monkey wrench into things.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Gambling depends on dumb luck to win.
> 
> Crypto is not comparable that way.  If you do your research in crypto, the odds are in your favor to win.  Try "researching" a slot maching or RNG lootbox...  yeah, not going to happen, and probably will get you kicked out of the Casino.
> 
> As said, you are very late to the crypto bashing party.  The fact that your comment has upvotes shows how frothing at the mouth can be quite endearing to people who hate something, however.


Sorry, but just as with any type of financial investment, in the end it's all gambling. Sure, research can mitigate risk to a certain extent, but in the end there's no difference between betting on red at a craps table, investing in stock, or buying crypto - in each case the outcome is decided by forces entirely outside of your control. As such, it's gambling, plain and simple. Learning to analyze the patterns and systems that endure in various forms of gambling to win doesn't make it any less gambling, just higher effort and (slightly) lower risk. Buying lottery tickets is still gambling even if you buy every single possible combination of numbers.

Most people today seem to be in the "crypto is only viable for investment, not mining" boat, which makes crypto for all intents and purposes no different whatsoever than buying stock or bonds or any other item with a mutually agreed-upon value. And, again, considering that this immediately means the "market" will be controlled by risk-averse, greedy, gambling addicted financiers (seriously, you know of shorting and all the other _actual, indisputable bets_ they rely on to make money, right?), which again means that you have _zero control_. Again: this is gambling.

Oh, and then there are the bazillion scams out there, from fraudulent ICOs to exchanges shutting down and all that jazz. Alongside this you have the fact that most of the crypto community is ideologically tilted _agianst _regulation and oversight, which means scams, theft and bluffs are an intrinsic part of the game, that apparently has to be accepted.


As for my comment, it was mostly pointing towards crypto proponents evangelizing "Blockchain is the future" without showing a single _actually useful _example of blockchain tech outside of cryptocurrency - at least from what I've seen. There _are _potential use cases, but given that people can barely agree on what "blockchain" even means, the whole discussion smacks of snake oil. If we agree that a distributed ledger system is a necessity for something to be blockchain-related, then we have to exclude a _lot _of "blockchain based" tech that doesn't have that. And if it doesn't then it's not really any different from just using encryption for whatever, which has been done for decades - and thus, relating it to cryptocurrency really only serves as a rhetorical tactic to make cryptocurrency look good. Then, of course, there are a lot of situations where a distributed ledger won't be feasible for various reasons - data security, privacy, countering industrial espionage, and the cost of maintaining a distributed network of nodes to keep the ledgers running, to mention a few. The main argument for distributed ledger tech is "security through transparency", which would give most companies and governmets the heebie jeebies from a mile off. I'm all for transparency in business, but it's not realistic in a traditional capitalist system, especially in a decentralized and voluntary system. And the whole point of maintaining a distributed ledger system collapses if access to the ledger is limited. Sure, it'll make it somewhat more difficult to screw with the ledger than if there was a single copy in one place, but that's already standard operating procedure pretty much anywhere: keep your records in multiple places and compare them to screen for errors and fraud. Adding a requirement that entries be cryptographically signed doesn't really bring much new to the table.

I'm not "foaming at the mouth". If you see reasonable skepticism towards a largely untested tech that has yet to show any real potential outside of grandiose on-paper ideas or money games as "foaming at the mouth", you really ought to take a hard look at your own beliefs.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 4, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Gambling depends on dumb luck to win.
> 
> Crypto is not comparable that way.  If you do your research in crypto, the odds are in your favor to win.  Try "researching" a slot maching or RNG lootbox...  yeah, not going to happen, and probably will get you kicked out of the Casino.
> 
> As said, you are very late to the crypto bashing party.  The fact that your comment has upvotes shows how frothing at the mouth can be quite endearing to people who hate something, however.



its an easy way to acquire cypto "status" as well.. he he

as for it being a gamble.. i own crypto but can honestly say never in my life have i bought a lottery ticket.. 

for me its more a store of value.. fiat money sat in the bank for sure isnt.. i own some gold.. some silver and some crypto i do not long term trust fiat money sat in the bank as a store of value.. at the press of a button "they" could take the lot off you or at least a big chunk of it and at some time in the not so far future they probably will.. 

trog


----------



## hat (Jun 4, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Most people today seem to be in the "crypto is only viable for investment, not mining" boat, which makes crypto for all intents and purposes no different whatsoever than buying stock or bonds or any other item with a mutually agreed-upon value. And, again, considering that this immediately means the "market" will be controlled by risk-averse, greedy, gambling addicted financiers (seriously, you know of shorting and all the other _actual, indisputable bets_ they rely on to make money, right?), which again means that you have _zero control_. Again: this is gambling.



I don't understand this group. Sure you can invest and play the market, but you can also instead of investing say $500 in crypto directly, you could instead buy a GTX1070 and mine. Sure, it'll take about 9 months at the current rate to hit ROI (and this of course can go up or down). But then, you'll be in the black, and you can play the trading game all you want with what you earn from it, and the card continues to mine and earn more.

I suppose the idea behind that is it's quicker to earn just playing the trading game... but I chose the long road, I guess. The trading game is also riskier, I think. Even if the market devalues, you can still mine and earn _something_...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 4, 2018)

Without the traders, the miners have no one to sell to.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 4, 2018)

hat said:


> I don't understand this group. Sure you can invest and play the market, but you can also instead of investing say $500 in crypto directly, you could instead buy a GTX1070 and mine. Sure, it'll take about 9 months at the current rate to hit ROI (and this of course can go up or down). But then, you'll be in the black, and you can play the trading game all you want with what you earn from it, and the card continues to mine and earn more.
> 
> I suppose the idea behind that is it's quicker to earn just playing the trading game... but I chose the long road, I guess. The trading game is also riskier, I think. Even if the market devalues, you can still mine and earn _something_...



late last summer i spent about £4000 building a mining machine.. at the time that amount would have bought me one whole bitcoin.. i am over my return on investment just about but hindsight still tells i would have been better off buying the bitcoin.. 

but as you say my miner is still earning and will probably keep doing so for some time to come.. my 10 x 1070  cards are currently at $15 dollars per day.. less the leccy of course.. 

i am still one of those people that expect the crypto price to start going up again.. rightly or wrongly i am still a hodler.. he he.. 

trog


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 4, 2018)

trog100 said:


> late last summer i spent about £4000 building a mining machine.. at the time that amount would have bought me one whole bitcoin.. i am over my return on investment just about but hindsight still tells i would have been better off buying the bitcoin..
> 
> but as you say my miner is still earning and will probably keep doing so for some time to come.. my 10 x 1070  cards are currently at $15 dollars per day.. less the leccy of course..
> 
> ...



You are seriously missing out... how in the world could 10 1070's only make 15$ per day? You should be making $20 minimum right now.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 4, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> You are seriously missing out... how in the world could 10 1070's only make 15$ per day? You should be making $20 minimum right now.


Probably due to UK Electricity Prices Per Kwh Being  expensive


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 4, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> Probably due to UK Electricity Prices Per Kwh Being  expensive



I'd think so, except he said it was $15 per day minus electricity. He should be grossing at least $20 per day. (Then again, I'm assuming he means USD... no idea on conversions, so that may be my confusion, if he's talking about another currency.)


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 4, 2018)

US Dollar to British Pound Sterling currency exchange rates       

*15 USD = 11.2604 GBP
15 GBP = 19.9816 USD*

*well he may be just converting wrong  he will have to enlighten us*


Spoiler:   Don't shoot the Messenger :)       



He may also be quoting in $$$ as he may think its easier to quote $$$ So Americans understand Better


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 4, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Declining for the foreseeable future but can't rule out the possibility of another round of manipulation.  There may be another bubble in the future but it won't be as big.  Most people are familiar enough with the concept of cryptocurrencies to know the risks.  Ignorance drove the dot-com bubble and the cryptocurrency bubble.  In both cases, there was a specific example after the fact to point to and say, "this has happened before."  It tampers expectations greatly.
> 
> 
> So was the dot-com industry.  Bubbles form when the public at large get ensnared in it.  That's exactly what happened to cryptocurrencies.  You could argue that dot-com bubble and burst took years rather than months.   I would retort that extreme volatility isn't in NASDAQ's nature like cryptocurrencies.  Money tends to move between shares rather than into and out of the market entirely like cryptocurrencies.


the dot com bubble didnt ever burst its kept growing??  facebook google and amazon are just the biggest companies in the world after all and still new companies have room to grow, just a bad analogy and very arguable, and the this has happened before scenario(bubble)  already happened twice to bitcoin ??, i wouldnt count out another, I've told anyone who asks me this.

the markets a rollercoaster till mid to late july then its going to steadily increase upto december, that's what i think and still it's not dying, neither is mining.

i think i saw a coin debut on crytocompare at something like 2,333,000 ea earlier today with a market cap of 20 billion after a minute, again i wish i had just one of those at that minute ,doh.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 4, 2018)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> the dot com bubble didnt ever burst its kept growing??


Most of the companies responsible for the bubble went under or merged.  NASDAQ at large did and other tech companies emerged from the rubble and kept growing.  There was never a second dot-com bubble.




theoneandonlymrk said:


> facebook google and amazon are just the biggest companies in the world after all and still new companies have room to grow, just a bad analogy and very arguable, and the this has happened before scenario(bubble)  already happened twice to bitcoin ??, i wouldnt count out another, I've told anyone who asks me this.


Of the three, Apple is the highest on Fortune 500 in fourth place.  These are companies that have a lot of mindshare (high market cap) but they're not a critical part of the US economy, nevermind the world.

Bubbles require public interest to form (a huge influx of low-knowledge traders).  The two events you're talking about were caused by internal struggles in the market.  Bubbles..._real bubbles_...only happen once per sector because the bubble itself informs the public (huge media coverage and huge scare when it bursts).




theoneandonlymrk said:


> i think i saw a coin debut on crytocompare at something like 2,333,000 ea earlier today with a market cap of 20 billion after a minute, again i wish i had just one of those at that minute ,doh.


Probably a glitch.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 4, 2018)

To use the dot com bubble as a reason to believe that crypto will die is to ignore the fact that AFTER the dot com bubble burst, and all the snake oil and ghost products were weeded out, the IT sector had massive and stable growth to become one of the most important business sectors on the planet. 

If you're going to use the dot com bubble example, don't ignore the post-2005 side of the graph. Because if we're saying that the crypto bubble is just like the dot com bubble and will behave the same way, then we're saying that in the next 10-15 years, crypto will enjoy huge and stable growth. 

Pretty convincing argument you've got there.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 4, 2018)

I feel like "bubble" has become Ford's latest buzzword, honestly.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Most of the companies responsible for the bubble went under or merged.  NASDAQ at large did and other tech companies emerged from the rubble and kept growing.  There was never a second dot-com bubble.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I did think it was a glitch ,i have'nt bought one ,cant even remember the name.

bubble whatever, i just disagree , the .com bubble ended up with a fair few corpses but those that weathered did better then your insinuating and it is still not fitting to me as an example , it fits in some regards but not on the whole.

" Bubbles..._real bubbles_...only happen once per sector because the bubble itself informs the public (huge media coverage and huge scare when it bursts)." 

i don't share that opinion as being definitive ,that's the typical expected path perhaps but not definitive , what Big scare was there?.

the many hacks etc, they have'nt dented the crypto economy, as much as the same, in fiat land would, imho.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 5, 2018)

i am mining eth like i mostly have been.. currently my 10 x 1070 at just over 30 mhs a piece just over 300 in total are showing just under $15 US dollars per day.. pretty much what i expect them to..

nicehash  shows about the same.. maybe i should be mining something else.. i dont swap about just keep mining eth..

so if some folks think i am doing something wrong (there is fair difference between 15 dollars US and 20 dollars US) please tell me what i am doing wrong.. he he

this is as i said before minus electricity costs..

i eagerly await whatever information there is that will turn my 15 dollars US into 20 dollars US..

i talk in US dollars because most folks on here think in US dollars.. in fact where crypto is concerned so do i.. 

trog

ps.. actually my round figure of 15 US dollars per day was very generous.. its currently nearer 13 US dollars per day.. and i am still waiting..


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> To use the dot com bubble as a reason to believe that crypto will die is to ignore the fact that AFTER the dot com bubble burst, and all the snake oil and ghost products were weeded out, the IT sector had massive and stable growth to become one of the most important business sectors on the planet.


And what gives you the impression a purely speculative market like cryptocurrencies could ever achieve any notion of stability?  IT had products and services to sell.  All cryptocurrencies have is demand for itself.



theoneandonlymrk said:


> i don't share that opinion as being definitive ,that's the typical expected path perhaps but not definitive , what Big scare was there?.


Regulation of Bitcoin Will Cause the Bubble to Burst

Article dated January 22, 2018.  That was absolutely the case.


> Once Bitcoin is regulated, much of the attraction stemming from its decentralized nature as well as independence from governments, central banks, fiat currencies, and the traditional banking monopoly will evaporate. That, along with its lack of utility, inability to be objectively valued, and failure to become a widely accepted currency, will bring the bubble to a sharp and savage end.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> And what gives you the impression a purely speculative market like cryptocurrencies could ever achieve any notion of stability?  IT had products and services to sell.  All cryptocurrencies have is demand for itself.



That's because you have no imagination. Crypto has plenty of utility. Even if it didn't, a US dollar isn't a product or service either, and yet is valuable. 

Obviously this conversation is going to go round and round in circles, because at this point you're going to go back to "US dollar has something backing it and crypto doesn't." Then I'll say "Yes, it has the people investing in it backing it, same as the US dollar" and we'll start this whole thing over.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> That's because you have no imagination. Crypto has plenty of utility.


Cryptocurrency evangelists keep saying this, yet I've still not seen a single actually useful application of this tech outside of cryptocurrencies. Cryptography is massively useful, but in no way new. Open, distributed ledgers are kinda-sorta new, but only really the "open" part. And so on. Do you have any examples? If not, at least I'm going to keep my skepticism. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but can't say that seems likely for now.



Papahyooie said:


> Even if it didn't, a US dollar isn't a product or service either, and yet is valuable.
> 
> Obviously this conversation is going to go round and round in circles, because at this point you're going to go back to "US dollar has something backing it and crypto doesn't." Then I'll say "Yes, it has the people investing in it backing it, same as the US dollar" and we'll start this whole thing over.


You kind of have a point here, but there are some major differences. The US Dollar is a bad example, though, as it's the most-used and most accepted currency out there. Let's compare Bitcoin to something smaller and more comparable: the Norwegian Krone.

-The NOK has ~5 million people "accepting" it as their default means of quantifying value, and for everyday transactions of various kinds. BTC probably has far more people involved than that, but roughly zero of those rely on it entirely, or even for the majority of things they use money for.
-The NOK has the support of a country, its government, and thus any and all business conducted inside of and out of that country shores up its value. BTC has a heap of hobbyists, a few companies, and another minor heap of investment bankers (read: gambling addicts putting money into pretty much anything that might score them a win, but who also cut their losses and run for the hills at the first sign of danger).
-For scale: On the 21st of December 2015, there were 24 411 085 digital payment transactions processed in Norway, of which the vast majority were in NOK (yeah, we're a largely cashless country). At the time, that was a new record - it's probably been beaten by now. BTC has yet to reach 450 000 transactions in any single day.
-Comparing total value is tricky, as the total value of a currency is meaningless, but as BTC isn't really treated as a currency (which makes sense, as it's barely accepted as one anywhere) but rather as a tradeable good with its value defined by the market. As such, the most meaningful comparison for me (who knows next to nothing about macroeconomics or finance, that is) is GDP (as the NOK is a national currency) vs. market capitalization. The GDP of Norway in 2017 was 3'299'005'000'000 NOK (~404'787'913'500 USD). The current market cap of BTC is 127'275'455'176 USD.
-Of course, the GDP of a country is a far more stable and predictable amount than a market cap, which is entirely dependent upon the whims of the herd of semi-panicked animals that investment bankers often resemble. As such, the NOK is a far more stable and reliable entity compared to BTC (even if the relation between GDP and currency is loose at best, and a whole host of other factors impact it more directly (such as the price of oil, in our case)).

In other words: on a global economic scale, BTC is a flyspeck. Its market cap is quite large, but as a currency, it's barely used at all. Its primary purpose used to be storing value, but now that has turned more towards gambling on that value increasing. It's essentially useless for trading and exchange, and both expensive and massively impractical. While the distributed ledger system theoretically gives it some advantages compared to centralized currencies, those are entirely negated by the fact that its value is essentially determined by coked-up Wall Streeters. In addition to this, the "creation" of whatever unit of cryptocurrency you choose is reliant upon burning energy for no practical reason whatsoever (outside of generating this potentially valuable, potentially not "currency") and thus causing massive pollution in the process. I really don't see many advantages to this, truth be told.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 5, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Cryptocurrency evangelists keep saying this, yet I've still not seen a single actually useful application of this tech outside of cryptocurrencies. Cryptography is massively useful, but in no way new. Open, distributed ledgers are kinda-sorta new, but only really the "open" part. And so on. Do you have any examples? If not, at least I'm going to keep my skepticism. I'll gladly be proven wrong, but can't say that seems likely for now.
> 
> 
> You kind of have a point here, but there are some major differences. The US Dollar is a bad example, though, as it's the most-used and most accepted currency out there. Let's compare Bitcoin to something smaller and more comparable: the Norwegian Krone.
> ...




Aaand there we are, back to page 2 of the thread. 

Called it.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Aaand there we are, back to page 2 of the thread.
> 
> Called it.


Hmm. It's almost like this was the topic of the discussion. Hm. Let me check.




Yep, that looks right to me.

Or are you having issues with people questioning the foundations of your convictions? Oh dear, so sorry about that, that's really too bad. I'll stop right away, of course. One should never, ever question one's convictions. That's horrible.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Even if it didn't, a US dollar isn't a product or service either, and yet is valuable.


It is a product (commodity) and service (the entire US financial industry which is 13% of the US economy as of 2002).


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 5, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Hmm. It's almost like this was the topic of the discussion. Hm. Let me check.
> View attachment 102093
> Yep, that looks right to me.
> 
> Or are you having issues with people questioning the foundations of your convictions? Oh dear, so sorry about that, that's really too bad. I'll stop right away, of course. One should never, ever question one's convictions. That's horrible.



I said nothing of the sort. I said we've already been through this, in this and other threads. 



FordGT90Concept said:


> It is a product (commodity) and service (the entire US financial industry which is 13% of the US economy as of 2002).



Ok that's fine, but by that logic, then so is crypto, and its associated services and products.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> I said nothing of the sort. I said we've already been through this, in this and other threads.


Well, it's still the topic up for discussion here, unless language has suddenly lost all meaning. If you have issues with people staying on topic, that's on you. Apparently you see this discussion as "finished" somehow, yet I've not seen anything to indicate that. If you're tired of having to defend your convictions, that's understandable, but also not an excuse to end the discussion.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 5, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It is a product (commodity) and service (the entire US financial industry which is 13% of the US economy as of 2002).



Of Course it is
 Simple irrefutable Fact 
Many people including Some Nation states will go to great lengths to produce Forgarys /fakes ect  because its a Real Product that can be handled copied and reproduced and passed on

CAN that be Said of ...............


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 5, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Well, it's still the topic up for discussion here, unless language has suddenly lost all meaning. If you have issues with people staying on topic, that's on you. Apparently you see this discussion as "finished" somehow, yet I've not seen anything to indicate that. If you're tired of having to defend your convictions, that's understandable, but also not an excuse to end the discussion.



I agree completely. You're free to discuss as you please. I don't see the discussion as finished at all. But you quoted me directly, right after I had said that we were going to go back to the beginning of the conversation. I simply said that I was correct in the assumption. There doesn't seem to be much point in rehashing the same arguments over and over again is all I'm saying.



trog100 said:


> i am mining eth like i mostly have been.. currently my 10 x 1070 at just over 30 mhs a piece just over 300 in total are showing just under $15 US dollars per day.. pretty much what i expect them to..
> nicehash  shows about the same.. maybe i should be mining something else.. i dont swap about just keep mining eth..
> so if some folks think i am doing something wrong (there is fair difference between 15 dollars US and 20 dollars US) please tell me what i am doing wrong.. he he
> this is as i said before minus electricity costs..
> ...



I see. You're just mining ether. I would recommend going back to Nicehash, if you can stomach using them again after the hack. A 1070 should gross at least $2 per day on average. (Nevermind what the profitability calculator on their website says.) Or just mine Zcash or Bitcoin Cash instead.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 6, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Cryptocurrency evangelists keep saying this, yet I've still not seen a single actually useful application of this tech outside of cryptocurrencies.



Have you ever tried to send money internationally?


----------



## hat (Jun 6, 2018)

Both my 1070s are currently mining Lyra2REv2, 68.454MH/s combined, for .43499BTC/day or $3.32USD/day. That's $1.66 each. 

If I could be making $4/day instead of $3.32/day I'd like to know how... heh.

That said, my trusty box fan quit working on me. I've had it blowing air in the side of my case for about a year now. Looks like next time I go to wal-mart I'm also grabbing a fan...

A long term dream of mine is to have a rack/open air miner kinda like @trog100 has in my garage or basement or something... preferably garage. Unfortunately I have none of those things, and a garage would mean I'd also have a mortgage... ouch!


----------



## trog100 (Jun 6, 2018)

your figures tend to match mine hat .. they always have done and still do..

as for me going back to nicehash... its all set up and often run it just to compare its returns to what i am getting mining eth.. they are always very similar..

nicehash by the way are slowly paying back what people lost during the hack.. its at %45 now which in my case is around a $1000 dollars US..

at a  closer look nicehash does seem to be currently producing a better return according to my two  card desktop rig which is showing 3.76 US dollars.. times that by 5 and it gives just over 18 dollars US... which is way better than the 13.5 dollars i am currently getting mining eth... i must learn not to be so lazy and check this sh-t more often.. whoops..

trog

ps.. having just said that my desktop rig is now at just over 3 dollars.. i will run nicehash for a few days for a better estimate..


----------



## Valantar (Jun 6, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> Have you ever tried to send money internationally?


Yep. Western Union is quite reliable in my experience, and the fees are acceptable for infrequent use. This is one case where I suppose an open, distributed and cryptographically signed ledger could make sense, but the idea isn't exactly ground-breaking. Also, considering that cryptocurrency transfer fees through any exchange are just as bad as WU, you'd have to DIY the transfer, which the vast majority of people won't be willing or able to do - even if that entails nothing more than emailing a wallet file or whatever.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 6, 2018)

i both mine and hodle crypto but currently Ebay is my shop and paypal my means of payment.. if i buy stuff from within the UK i pay more but get it quicker.. if i buy stuff directly from china i pay less but get it slower.. where i buy from does mosly depend on delivery times.. paypal is pretty much universal money.. i dont see this changing any time soon..

as for me holding crypto.. it just seems to make more sense doing that than lending it to the banks to "gamble" with for free.. or in some cases (negative interest rates and a cashless society coming soon) paying them to gamble with my money..

ford may well be right with what he says about crypto.. he just conveniently forgets what a shower of sh-t the alternatives are.. 

i have some money still sat in the bank.. just enough to cover short term emergencies.. i havnt totally bet the farm on crypto.. he he..

trog


----------



## Valantar (Jun 6, 2018)

trog100 said:


> i both mine and hodle crypto but currently Ebay is my shop and paypal my means of payment.. if i buy stuff from within the UK i pay more but get it quicker.. if i buy stuff directly from china i pay less but but get it slower.. i dont see this changing any time soon..
> 
> as for me holding crypto.. it just seems to make more sense doing that than lending it to the banks to "gamble" with for free.. or in some cases (negative interest rates and a cashless society coming soon) paying them to gamble with my money.


Sounds like you have a reasonably sensible attitude, at least  As for the latter issue, though, there is one blatantly obvious solution to that which a lot of crypto-libertarians seem allergic to even mentioning: strict regulation of banking and the finance industry, with enforced transparency and public oversight (which, by nature of being enforced by public agencies, would again be transparent). Of course, ideologically this is anathema to the "deregulate everything" mantra of libertarianism, but it's a far simpler and safer solution than moving to a decentralized and unregulated form of payment. That's not saying that we can't _also_ have that (the idea of a supranational currency is a good one and could significantly benefit the world - which the Euro was the first semi-successful attempt at), but the banking-for-profit model _needs _to be checked - badly! - or we'll keep having situations like the 2008 recession. One of the key reasons for the 2008 recession was the recent removal of strict regulations barring savings banks from high-risk investments, subprime lending, and so on. If they had stayed in place, savings banks would have been entirely immune from the recession. A decentralized and unregulated currency won't safeguard anyone from anything like that - quite the opposite, really, as it'd be a system frighteningly open to gaming and manipulation, with zero repercussions (unless, of course, you create a centralized authority regulating this, which ... you know. yeah.). Savings banks also need to be guaranteed by the government, at least to a certain degree, but also with personal responsibility for bank executives. This shouldn't be so that the bank stays open or the executives get paid (which was what happened in 2008-9), but so that the people entrusting their savings to the bank won't have them gambled away by idiots. In other words: a system where the government bails out bank _customers_, not employees and executives, and where that outlay is subsequently billed (at least to the degree possible) to the people responsible (both individually and as a group; not just single investment bankers or CEOs, but the entire leadership of the bank, with the highest bills going to the ones with the highest incomes and accumulated assets throughout the preceding years).

The response to the 2008 recession was a travesty, but libertarianism, (further!) deregulation and creating what essentially amounts to a zero (effective) oversight (due to no means of enforcing anything) parallel banking system won't help at all.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 6, 2018)

trog100 said:


> it just seems to make more sense doing that than lending it to the banks to "gamble" with for free..


In USA, accounts are insured up to a balance of $250,000 by NCUA or FDIC.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 6, 2018)

hat said:


> Both my 1070s are currently mining Lyra2REv2, 68.454MH/s combined, for .43499BTC/day or $3.32USD/day. That's $1.66 each.
> If I could be making $4/day instead of $3.32/day I'd like to know how... heh.
> That said, my trusty box fan quit working on me. I've had it blowing air in the side of my case for about a year now. Looks like next time I go to wal-mart I'm also grabbing a fan...
> A long term dream of mine is to have a rack/open air miner kinda like @trog100 has in my garage or basement or something... preferably garage. Unfortunately I have none of those things, and a garage would mean I'd also have a mortgage... ouch!



The most comparable thing I have to a 1070 is the 980Ti in my gaming machine. As it's an overclocked higher end model, it should be nearly identical in performance to a 1070. Right this second, it reads that it's making $1.88 per day. If I average it over a week, it's around $2.00 per day. And that's at 80% power limit, with a temp limit of 75 degrees Celsius (I like to keep my cards happy, especially since this one is in my gaming machine as I said.) Granted, it's an EVGA overclocked model, and super efficient (for a 980Ti) but still... I'm not sure how my 980Ti is making more MH than your 1070, but as we speak, I'm doing roughly 36 MH/s with it (Lyra2REv2)

Have you actually done the math to figure out what it's actually making over a week or so? If you're just looking at the spot value on Nicehash, then it's pretty much always going to look lower than it actually is. Or perhaps you're throttling down due to temps since your fan isn't working? I don't know man.


----------



## yotano211 (Jun 6, 2018)

hat said:


> Both my 1070s are currently mining Lyra2REv2, 68.454MH/s combined, for .43499BTC/day or $3.32USD/day. That's $1.66 each.
> 
> If I could be making $4/day instead of $3.32/day I'd like to know how... heh.
> 
> ...


Just dont have 11 mining rigs with 7 or 8 gpus/each in a 650sqft apartment.


----------



## hat (Jun 6, 2018)

Nah the machine is all good without the fan. I've turned my power target down further to 60% for the time being, but those figures are from running at 80%.

The 980Ti is a really strong card, maybe your overclocked model is just able to keep up better?

I do just go by what nicehash says, I haven't done any math on that.



yotano211 said:


> Just dont have 11 mining rigs with 7 or 8 gpus/each in a 650sqft apartment.



lol I could never, the power here would never handle it and even if it did it would be way too much heat... That's why I want a garage, maybe with a nice 240v socket.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 6, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> In USA, accounts are insured up to a balance of $250,000 by NCUA or FDIC.



the US financial system works until it dosnt.. lets just say you have more faith in what you are told than i do.. trillions in debt with no hope or intentions of ever paying it back.. as i say it all works until it dosnt.. the day it dosnt is coming.. he he

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 6, 2018)

You're confusing monetary policy with fiscal policy.  The former is deliberately divorced from the latter.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 6, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> You're confusing fiscal policy with government policy.  The former is deliberately divorced from the latter.




HA

HA

HA

HA

HA!

Now we know for sure not to take you seriously.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 6, 2018)

Most constructive post ever, that. ^

Have some light reading: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomc.htm


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 6, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Most constructive post ever, that. ^
> 
> Have some light reading: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomc.htm



I'm fully aware of how the federal reserve is supposed to work, and how it works in reality. Anyone who thinks it works as intended (or even would work, IF it worked as intended) is delusional and naive.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 6, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> I'm fully aware of how the federal reserve is supposed to work, and how it works in reality. Anyone who thinks it works as intended (or even would work, IF it worked as intended) is delusional and naive.


Ah, yes. The classic "regulation and laws are pointless as people are far too corrupt to ever uphold them" argument. While I'm inclined to agree that the US system seems utterly broken (from my limited knowledge given that I don't live there and haven't done so for 25 years, at which point I was 5), saying "burn it all down" doesn't solve anything. The thing is, your assertion that the idea of regulation, separation of powers and checks and balances ever working is "delusional and naive" is verifiably false. There are quite a few countries in the world still with fully functioning parallels to the US Federal Reserve, as are there countries where the central bank is independently operated - and those systems usually work fine. It all starts collapsing when a) the society in question is rampant with corruption, b) the financial industry is systematically deregulated, or c) neo-liberal politicians are allowed to screw everyone (who isn't bloody rich) over.

edit: spelling and grammar.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 6, 2018)

as i said earlier it all works until it dosnt.. 

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 7, 2018)

We're coming up on almost half a century for the USA and fiat was used elsewhere for longer.  It's proven to work better than the gold standard.  Bitcoin emulates the gold standard, actually, and it's traded like a commodity instead of a fiat currency.  Ergo cryptocurrency was predisposed to fail as a currency by design and as referenced by history.  Blockchain can expeditated some slow transactions (especially foreign exchange) but it will never replace fiat.  There is absolutely no indication it will now nor in the future.  Supplement: yes; supplant: no.  Case in point: when's the last time you use cryptocurrency to buy something without the use of intermediaries for exchange?  When's the last time you bought something without the use of intermediaries with the pound sterling?  'Nuff said.  Commodity versus internationally recognized currency.


----------



## CheapMeat (Jun 7, 2018)

Am I better off with NiceHash than WinMiner?  I've used both so far at different points but I'm just casually mining when not using my PC.

EDIT: Found my answer.  WinMiner is significantly more profitable on my rig and I prefer the UI & more options that is has. It also has a portable version and other minor things that are better than NiceHash 2.  The preferred the older NiceHash as well.


----------



## hat (Jun 7, 2018)

Never heard of WinMiner. There is a Nicehash Legacy build, which looks and functions like the old Nicehash.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 7, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> We're coming up on almost half a century for the USA and fiat was used elsewhere for longer.  It's proven to work better than the gold standard.  Bitcoin emulates the gold standard, actually, and it's traded like a commodity instead of a fiat currency.  Ergo cryptocurrency was predisposed to fail as a currency by design and as referenced by history.  Blockchain can expeditated some slow transactions (especially foreign exchange) but it will never replace fiat.  There is absolutely no indication it will now nor in the future.  Supplement: yes; supplant: no.  Case in point: when's the last time you use cryptocurrency to buy something without the use of intermediaries for exchange?  When's the last time you bought something without the use of intermediaries with the pound sterling?  'Nuff said.  Commodity versus internationally recognized currency.



we are into pretty deep stuff here ford.. as for the future of crypto i have no real idea.. to me building a miner was a hobby thing.. then crypto became an investment.. at first it looked very good i saw my stash quadruple in value and then i saw it lose two thirds of that value.. i am still in profit and hope that profit grows.. i dont intend to sell any of what i own and my miner is slowly adding to my stash..

crypto has lost a big chunk of its peak value but its also lost its ridiculous volatility which was one of its main knocking points.. it seems to have reached a degree of price stability which was probably essential before it can become useful.. bitcoin is  currently trading sideways at around 7500 US dollars.. the price of bitcoin seems to be at the heart of things everything else follows that.. i am still expecting to see an increase in the general value of crypto.. but as i often say.. i could be wrong..

as i said earlier paypal is my universal currency ebay is my shop.. i can buy and instantly pay for  pretty much any thing from any where in the world.. at the moment i have no desire to use anything else..

as for the "future" it really is a f-cking great big "unknown".. very very much so..

interestingly the pound sterling  might be my own official currency but before i can buy anything from outside the UK  that pound sterling has to be converted into US dollars.. paypal does all this sh-t invisibly.. but it happens.. what happens to the US dollar if this situation ever changes will be interesting to see.. he he

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 7, 2018)

trog100 said:


> interestingly the pound sterling  might be my own official currency but before i can buy anything from outside the UK  that pound sterling has to be converted into US dollars.. paypal does all this sh-t invisibly.. but it happens.. what happens to the US dollar if this situation ever changes will be interesting to see.. he he


Consider your annual budget.  I guarentee you the bulk of your puchases were in pound sterling (food, taxes, rent/mortgage, etc.)--national purchases.  The stuff you're buying internationally most likely falls into the category of luxury items.

PayPal is evidence why blockchain is unnecessary even in foreign exchange.  The market has come up with a solution that works that is very, very efficient (PayPal basically settles the debt instantly and eats the profit/loss of the actual exchange).


----------



## trog100 (Jun 7, 2018)

paypal takes a cut ford.. it uses its own exchange rate.. its never quite what it should be.. but it works and is click a button convenient.. you would be wrong as regards the bulk of my purchases being in pounds sterling.. my house is payed for and i am retired.. the bulk of my purchases are probably what some folks would call luxury items.. he he..

trog


----------



## Vya Domus (Jun 7, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Bitcoin emulates the gold standard, actually, and it's *traded like a commodity* instead of a fiat currency.



That's the bit that people don't want to admit.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 7, 2018)

trog100 said:


> paypal takes a cut ford.. it uses its own exchange rate.. its never quite what it should be..


That's the situation with any money exchange or money transfer service, including bitcoin exchanges. For comparison, Paypal's rates are generally significantly cheaper than most competitors. They make their money from scale, not big margins.


trog100 said:


> you would be wrong as regards the bulk of my purchases being in pounds sterling.. my house is payed for and i am retired.. the bulk of my purchases are probably what some folks would call luxury items.. he he..
> 
> trog


Well, then you're one of the lucky few who got there. From the way the world is going (with wage stagnation for everyone but the very wealthiest, and the systematic deconstruction of labor laws in most countries that have them), this is going to be come ever more rare an occurrence. For the vast majority of people both now and in the future, the vast majority of their expenses are "local" (as in food, living space) or semi-local (clothing is to a certain degree sold online, but rarely internationally). You're in a privileged position, which is no doubt nice, but a bad starting point for forming a coherent, realistic and fair ideology


----------



## yotano211 (Jun 8, 2018)

Paypal has higher fees when the transaction is overseas. US fees is 2.9%, UK fees, I think its 3.9% or 4.9%. Plus they make money when they have to convert currencies.


----------



## hat (Jun 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> your figures tend to match mine hat .. they always have done and still do..
> 
> as for me going back to nicehash... its all set up and often run it just to compare its returns to what i am getting mining eth.. they are always very similar..
> 
> ...



That's likely because Nicehash auto switches algorithms for you. While you're still mining ethereum, which seems to have dropped in value at the moment, I'm mining whatever coin is most profitable according to Nicehash for the best payout. If I wanted to I could force Nicehash to mine ethereum by disabling all algorithms but that one... but it's all BTC, so no reason not to let it do its thing. Only reason I can see to disable any algorithms is if your machine has a problem with one for some reason...


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 8, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Cryptocurrency evangelists keep saying this, yet I've still not seen a single actually useful application of this tech outside of cryptocurrencies.



You arent looking very hard then.

I've listed examples before.  Can't be arsed to do it again, frankly.


----------



## trog100 (Jun 8, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> You arent looking very hard then.
> 
> I've listed examples before.  Can't be arsed to do it again, frankly.



people cherry pick what they see and what they want to believe Mr frog.. human nature at work i suppose.. 

i am on the pro crypto side of this debate but i dont spend much time trying to justify its existence.. i do have a go at the odd anti comment but thats about all.. 

crypto is here and i think its here to stay but how it will affect the future i really havnt a clue.. it does fit in with the official desire for a cashless society but not the official desire (need) for control.. the future is open to bets as to who ends up controlling it..

trog


----------



## Valantar (Jun 8, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> You arent looking very hard then.
> 
> I've listed examples before.  Can't be arsed to do it again, frankly.


Not in this thread, at least. I can't be arsed to look through the 8 pages of results after searching for your posts in this subforum, so I guess we're at an impasse.

The closest thing I've seen to "practical"/"useful" applications of this is various megacorps investing in research into ways to use blockchain tech, but so far I haven't heard of anything even approaching actual results from any of that. But you're right, I'm not looking very hard, as I very quickly grow tired of the never-ending evangelism from every single news site covering this with any frequency. The Venn diagram of people who believe blockchain tech can be useful and people with an unflinching faith that crypto is the future seems to have a ~100% overlap, with everyone else being on the outside. I've yet to find a single article from a "crypto news" site that takes an even halfway skeptical approach to the subject they're covering - they seem laser focused on "how to make money" without ever questioning the ideological and technological foundations of what they're discussing. Which, unsurprisingly, seems to echo the sides in discussions like this. "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" => "Hay guise, is my mining rig running at peak efficiency?" The ability to question one's own convictions is a crucial one as a human, and it seems sorely lacking in discussions on this topic. I view myself as skeptical but open to persuasion, but that persuasion has to be in the form of something tangible, realistic and actually useful, not "you can get rich by investing in this stuff."


----------



## trog100 (Jun 8, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Not in this thread, at least. I can't be arsed to look through the 8 pages of results after searching for your posts in this subforum, so I guess we're at an impasse.
> 
> The closest thing I've seen to "practical"/"useful" applications of this is various megacorps investing in research into ways to use blockchain tech, but so far I haven't heard of anything even approaching actual results from any of that. But you're right, I'm not looking very hard, as I very quickly grow tired of the never-ending evangelism from every single news site covering this with any frequency. The Venn diagram of people who believe blockchain tech can be useful and people with an unflinching faith that crypto is the future seems to have a ~100% overlap, with everyone else being on the outside. I've yet to find a single article from a "crypto news" site that takes an even halfway skeptical approach to the subject they're covering - they seem laser focused on "how to make money" without ever questioning the ideological and technological foundations of what they're discussing. Which, unsurprisingly, seems to echo the sides in discussions like this. "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" => "Hay guise, is my mining rig running at peak efficiency?" The ability to question one's own convictions is a crucial one as a human, and it seems sorely lacking in discussions on this topic. I view myself as skeptical but open to persuasion, but that persuasion has to be in the form of something tangible, realistic and actually useful, not "you can get rich by investing in this stuff."



i question my own convictions to the point i find it difficult holding any and the older i get the more difficult it becomes.. 

as for this thread or site i dont think you will find that many avid crypto advocates.. in fact the opposite is the case.. there are a few died in the wool antis who will dream up any excuse to knock crypto.. other places often refer to them as "no coiners".. their real motivation seems a bit unclear..

ford has now earned himself "crypto champion" status from all the likes he gets from the "anti" lurkers.. he he

trog


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 8, 2018)

trog100 said:


> ford has now earned himself "crypto champion" status from all the likes he gets from the "anti" lurkers.. he he


For the record: I hate the branding system.


----------



## hat (Jun 8, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Not in this thread, at least. I can't be arsed to look through the 8 pages of results after searching for your posts in this subforum, so I guess we're at an impasse.
> 
> The closest thing I've seen to "practical"/"useful" applications of this is various megacorps investing in research into ways to use blockchain tech, but so far I haven't heard of anything even approaching actual results from any of that. But you're right, I'm not looking very hard, as I very quickly grow tired of the never-ending evangelism from every single news site covering this with any frequency. The Venn diagram of people who believe blockchain tech can be useful and people with an unflinching faith that crypto is the future seems to have a ~100% overlap, with everyone else being on the outside. I've yet to find a single article from a "crypto news" site that takes an even halfway skeptical approach to the subject they're covering - they seem laser focused on "how to make money" without ever questioning the ideological and technological foundations of what they're discussing. Which, unsurprisingly, seems to echo the sides in discussions like this. "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" => "Hay guise, is my mining rig running at peak efficiency?" The ability to question one's own convictions is a crucial one as a human, and it seems sorely lacking in discussions on this topic. I view myself as skeptical but open to persuasion, but that persuasion has to be in the form of something tangible, realistic and actually useful, not "you can get rich by investing in this stuff."



The way I see it, I stepped in when I saw an opportunity to make money. Yes, that's exactly it. For totally selfish reasons, I wanted a piece of the pie. I haven't been hiding that fact, either. I paid my money, received my hardware, and have been mining since. I see many others are the same way, to varying degrees. I'm just one small cog in a rather large machine. As far as I can tell, almost nobody is mining because they truly believe it's the path to the future or whatever, or for any other reason outside of financial gain...

Nobody does anything for no reason, right? Most of us do shit we hate to do, because we get paid doing it. I don't hate mining, but it's sure been a way to make a little extra money. It's not much, but it's something. It's helped me out a number of times already. I wouldn't quit my day job, though. I know I can go to work and get paid, but I don't know what crypto will look like a week from now. For me, it's a little side hustle that might one day be able to pay for something nice...


----------



## trog100 (Jun 8, 2018)

hat said:


> The way I see it, I stepped in when I saw an opportunity to make money. Yes, that's exactly it. For totally selfish reasons, I wanted a piece of the pie. I haven't been hiding that fact, either. I paid my money, received my hardware, and have been mining since. I see many others are the same way, to varying degrees. I'm just one small cog in a rather large machine. As far as I can tell, almost nobody is mining because they truly believe it's the path to the future or whatever, or for any other reason outside of financial gain...
> 
> Nobody does anything for no reason, right? Most of us do shit we hate to do, because we get paid doing it. I don't hate mining, but it's sure been a way to make a little extra money. It's not much, but it's something. It's helped me out a number of times already. I wouldn't quit my day job, though. I know I can go to work and get paid, but I don't know what crypto will look like a week from now. For me, it's a little side hustle that might one day be able to pay for something nice...



self interest is the major human motivator mitigated to a certain extent by the tit for tat principle.. 

i think valantar has jumped into the wrong thread to be honest.. 

trog


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 8, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Not in this thread, at least. I can't be arsed to look through the 8 pages of results after searching for your posts in this subforum, so I guess we're at an impasse.
> 
> The closest thing I've seen to "practical"/"useful" applications of this is various megacorps investing in research into ways to use blockchain tech, but so far I haven't heard of anything even approaching actual results from any of that. But you're right, I'm not looking very hard, as I very quickly grow tired of the never-ending evangelism from every single news site covering this with any frequency. The Venn diagram of people who believe blockchain tech can be useful and people with an unflinching faith that crypto is the future seems to have a ~100% overlap, with everyone else being on the outside. I've yet to find a single article from a "crypto news" site that takes an even halfway skeptical approach to the subject they're covering - they seem laser focused on "how to make money" without ever questioning the ideological and technological foundations of what they're discussing. Which, unsurprisingly, seems to echo the sides in discussions like this. "Do you think cryptocurrencies are the future?" => "Hay guise, is my mining rig running at peak efficiency?" The ability to question one's own convictions is a crucial one as a human, and it seems sorely lacking in discussions on this topic. I view myself as skeptical but open to persuasion, but that persuasion has to be in the form of something tangible, realistic and actually useful, not "you can get rich by investing in this stuff."



We've several times, here and other threads, explained our ideological reasoning for supporting crypto (if we as individuals have one.) You disagree with the principles behind it. So it follows that you will disagree with crypto in general. I support crypto for the possibility of a currency controlled by its users, and not by an oligarchy. From your posts, you obviously support the oligarchy. We will never agree on this, as it's a fundamental difference. You say you're open to persuasion, yet reject the core principles involved. So it's no surprise. 

The problem comes when you want to force your opinions on others. We want crypto. Let us have it. We don't want to force you to use crypto. The question of the OP is flawed. The question isn't "Is crypto the future". The question is "Is crypto the future for those that want it".

If people want to use or invest their money in an unregulated system, then let them do it. If you don't want to to do that....... don't. That's really all there is to it. You say to convince you, you need something realistic and useful (tangible need not apply, as we're specifically talking about a virtual item...) We ideologues see crypto as realistic and useful. You don't. We don't care.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jun 8, 2018)

Cant wait until the US decides to regulate the hell out of this. Gonna be epic seeing people flipping on Crypto. All its going to take is one single incident and this whole house of cards will fall. Unregulated systems like this always end in mass suicide.

I hate regulation but, on this Ill make an acception.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 8, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Not in this thread, at least.



*sighs*

In the "state of crypto" thread.

The currency tech itself is useful anyhow.  I use it a lot.  You don't.  That's why you don't see it.



TheMailMan78 said:


> I hate regulation but, on this Ill make an acception.



I really doubt you'll see any beyond taxes.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 9, 2018)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Ill make an acception.



I'm glad you came around and decided to accept it.  Crypto isn't bad if you take it for what it is.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 10, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> Crypto isn't bad if you take it for what it is.



I think half the problem honestly is 99% of the population still has no fricking clue what it is or how it works...


----------



## Valantar (Jun 10, 2018)

Sigh. I had a whole way-too-long post written up here, but decided to finish it today rather than post it last night. Lo and behold, the forum deletes my draft. Thanks, XenForo! I'll try to recreate it as best I can, I suppose.



Papahyooie said:


> We've several times, here and other threads, explained our ideological reasoning for supporting crypto (if we as individuals have one.) You disagree with the principles behind it. So it follows that you will disagree with crypto in general. I support crypto for the possibility of a currency controlled by its users, and not by an oligarchy. From your posts, you obviously support the oligarchy. We will never agree on this, as it's a fundamental difference. You say you're open to persuasion, yet reject the core principles involved. So it's no surprise.


First off: claiming that I "support the oligarchy" based on a critical stance towards cryptocurrencies is pretty out there. I'm a staunch supporter of participatory democracy, but with enough pragmatism that I accept that representative democracy is also a necessity for a functioning society. I could go on about this, but frankly that's not at all relevant here. Also, I don't live in a country as corrupt as the US, so for most Americans I probably come off as naive, but here it's not naivete, just realism. 

What is relevant, is that you say I "reject the core principles involved." As I understand you, the core principles here are that control over the currency is distributed, decentralized, and most importantly not held by any single nation, government or other entity. I won't say I reject those principles, but I question the outcome of them, and the feasibility of such a system in enacting meaningful positive change in the world. After all, most/all crypto ideologues sing the song of how crypto will liberate us from various systems of power; in other words the point seems to be to work towards the betterment of mankind. If that is so, what real, actual, workable and realistic forms of utilizing that "distributed power" do crypto holders or miners have? Do the currencies have clearly defined, easily accessible and openly available rules and regulations? If so, who enforces them, and how? What avenues do you as a crypto miner or owner have to influence the direction of the currency? If these mechanisms don't exist, how is that not simply a power vacuum, leaving power available for whoever has the resources to take it? What checks and balances are in place to avoid resource-rich entities gaining disproportional power? If your influence on the rules and guidelines controlling this currency is relative to your ability to buy and own said currency, isn't that the definition of a plutocracy, which is essentially a form of oligarchy? Decentralization and deregulation does not in any way logically or causally lead to a more fair distribution of power. Most of the time, it is exactly that which opens the door for oligarchy. Effective regulation, enforcement of rules, and predetermined democratic processes are necessary safeguards to _avoid _oligarchies, not the other way around.



Papahyooie said:


> The problem comes when you want to force your opinions on others. We want crypto. Let us have it. We don't want to force you to use crypto. The question of the OP is flawed. The question isn't "Is crypto the future". The question is "Is crypto the future for those that want it".


Sorry, but when have I tired to "force [my] opinion on others"? Can you please quote me on something where you can show me doing that? 'Cause if not, please stop projecting your insecurity onto me. Last I checked, this is a forum, which as far as I know is a place where people come to exchange and discuss opinions, experiences, ideas and subjects of interest. Discussion requires criticism and questioning, and if you equate voicing a critical opinion or asking critical questions with forcing ones opinions on others, you really ought to take a good look at your worldview and understanding of communication and discussion. If you're looking for an echo chamber, I don't think you're in the right place.

As for your alternative question, it simply shows a fundamental unwillingness to discuss the issue at hand. "Is crypto the future for those that want it?" is a meaningless rhetorical trick, which does not in any way open up a subject for discussion as the question itself precludes any answer that isn't "yes" - as that would be denying people freedom of choice. In other words, your way of asking the question is essentially a rhetorical trick trying to make people into say they want to take away your freedom of choice - which is a distraction and utterly unproductive for any kind of discussion. This, my friend, is a classic straw man argument. Please refrain from that.

The way I read the OP's question is based on how crypto is presented and discussed in the general public discourse - my impression is that this largely is a 50-50 split between "Crypto is a borderline magical technology that will bring ultimate liberty and wealth to all people" and "Crypto is a scam/hoax/Ponzi scheme, stay away". The way the OP formulates the question, it seems to take the former type of coverage/statements as basis for asking "is there any truth to this?" Which, at least to me, is a very worthwhile discussion to have - as it would be with any emerging technology or socioeconomic structure. I'm not saying I have any answers, but I have a lot of questions, some of them critical of the ideological underpinnings of crypto culture.



Papahyooie said:


> If people want to use or invest their money in an unregulated system, then let them do it. If you don't want to to do that....... don't. That's really all there is to it.


Sadly, that isn't all there is to it. Human activity is complex and human ideas and ideologies are exponentially more so. Saying "if you disagree, please just leave us alone" is again just a repetition of your personal discomfort with/distaste for discussing this complex subject. As I don't know you whatsoever I'm not going to speculate as to why this is, but your arguments don't add up to any more than that.

As an aside, effects, including economic, social, socioeconomic, sociopolitical or purely political ones, are all tangible, even if they originate in something virtual or fictional. I suppose "perceptible" or "palpable" would be slightly less metaphorical, but "tangible" is generally used as a term for something that can be felt, not only things that can be felt by touch - even if the latter is the dictionary definition. And effects of virtual objects are both easily felt, and very often measurable in many different ways.



Papahyooie said:


> You say to convince you, you need something realistic and useful (tangible need not apply, as we're specifically talking about a virtual item...) We ideologues see crypto as realistic and useful. You don't. We don't care.


Well, sadly, I'm not interested in whether or not you care. I'm interested in if anyone here is willing and/or able to bring forth some actual arguments for and examples of actual, real-world use cases of this technology beyond being yet another financial engineering scheme, for-profit betting ring, or just another commodity. My impression is that there is a disconnect between the dominant practice (for-profit mining or gambling/investment) and the dominant discourse (Crypto is world-changing new technology that will liberate money from government control!), and I'm asking if anyone is willing or able to discuss this and bring up valid and relevant counterarguments and further information. You're entirely welcome not to care, not to reply, not to take part in the discussion at all. That's your prerogative. 

What you're saying, though, is that because you don't care, I should go away and stop asking questions. That's not only unreasonable, but sets of some serious alarm bells in terms of your intellectual and ideological stance on this stuff that you claim to be so sure of. Of course, you might just be tired of criticism or discussing this subject for the umpteenth time. That's fine. Don't reply, then, and leave it to someone else. Or just link to a post where someone actually discusses the subject properly, and leave it at that. Or link to a web site or blog or whatever that presents these points. Or tell me something specific to google. Don't come dragging in poorly thought out rhetorical devices aimed at curbing discussion of the topic - it just makes you come off as closed-minded and domineering.

Now, as I said, I don't care even slightly whether individual people want to invest in crypto or not, nor am I here to judge anyone on their actions or practices. I'm here to discuss the topic of this thread. You, clearly, are not. You say you "see crypto as realistic and useful." Okay. How? Can you give me an example? Do you mean purely as a means of accumulating wealth? If so: sure, if that's enough for you and you don't care to look beyond that, be my guest, but at least have the honesty to say so. If there's more than that, would you care to elaborate? I'm not saying you have to, nor am I in any way saying your opinions or practices are somehow wrong (or right, for that matter (I still don't know what they are!) nor am I interested in judging you), I'm simply interested in hearing what you have to say on the topic. If all you have to say is "I like it, leave me alone", then at least have the character to admit as much, rather than trying to smear me with silly accusations and attempting to stop other people discussing the subject.


The thing is, contrary to how this discussion comes off it is entirely possible - and not really a problem at all - to do something, to make an effort in doing something, and still have reservations or moral qualms surrounding it. Or insecurities, or simply a complex, nuanced view of one's own practices. Every single person on this planet does this every single day. We're all hypocrites to various degrees. Humans are not purely rational beings. Your rhetoric, however, smacks of defensiveness, and nothing else. Which is entirely unwarranted - as I've said, I'm not here to judge, _I don't care whatsoever _what you personally do or why you do it, I'm simply interested in exploring the ideas and concepts surrounding this topic.


R-T-B said:


> *sighs*
> 
> In the "state of crypto" thread.
> 
> The currency tech itself is useful anyhow.  I use it a lot.  You don't.  That's why you don't see it.


I skimmed the first and last handful of pages, and couldn't find much beyond discussion of what to invest in and when/how to optimize your mining rig for the current market. If there's more there, sadly I can't be bothered to skim another 24-ish pages. I might be missing out, but it really shouldn't be that hard to repeat some of the points.

However, if your definition of "useful" is something between "I make money from it" and "I use it to buy/sell/exchange things", why is it (seemingly) a problem for you to discuss whether crypto is or isn't bringing anything new to the world? After all, commodities are quite abundant, and largely-unregulated international trade in various commodities is really not new at all. This is what leads me to ask about other uses of the tech, of which I still haven't seen any examples. If this is a new (well, technically a new-ish combination of already existing and established tech) tech yet its only realistic use is to do the same as already existing tech and practices, what does it bring to the world? I suppose the ability to accumulate a commodity through the ownership and use of off-the-shelf computer hardware rather than a factory, mine or other more traditional means of production, but does that really change anything? And, ultimately, if your argumentation stems from being in the right place at the right time to make money off of crypto, and that you like that, why is that so difficult to state? And again, if this is the case, why does this make it difficult to discuss these subjects at a non-personal political/technological/societal level?

That's what I'm struggling to grasp here. Everyone seems to be responding as if they're being attacked personally or being accused of being immoral or something like that. That's silly. It is entirely possible to discuss a subject at a non-personal level regardless of your own involvement in said subject.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 10, 2018)

Valantar said:


> That's what I'm struggling to grasp here. Everyone seems to be responding as if they're being attacked personally or being accused of being immoral or something like that.



I think that's because as you were told, you are very late to the discussions and most of the combatants here are very very worn out over the subject.

But to answer your coin, look at LBRY, sia coin, and my favorite, BOINC coin.  These are new, useful things brought about by crypto.  I could rattle off a few more, but @cdawall is far better at it than me, and I don't have time time frankly to do this rodeo anymore.

In my eyes, crypto is a very mundane but good thing that has a lot of people up in arms for reasons even they don't fully understand.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 10, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> up in arms for reasons



Read: GPUs are (were) expensive.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 10, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> Read: GPUs are (were) expensive.



That's part of it.  There's also a group I think that just plain doesn't get the concept, and that irritates them to no end.

Then of course, there's those who are afflicted by both.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 10, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> But to answer your coin, look at LBRY, sia coin, and my favorite, BOINC coin.  These are new, useful things brought about by crypto.  I could rattle off a few more, but @cdawall is far better at it than me, and I don't have time time frankly to do this rodeo anymore.


After a cursory glance, all of those look like genuinely useful things. I'll have to look into it some more (though there might be problems if the LBC of LBRY are tradeable and valued through trade, as that could break the entire publishing platform - but then, as I said, I barely skimmed a few paragraphs here, so I'm hoping they address that). Even if they somewhat have the taste of "sharing economy" startups (i.e. "stuff people have always done, just now it's online and has an app, so now it's techy and cool"), it's good to see some actually useful applications of this tech.


R-T-B said:


> I think that's because as you were told, you are very late to the discussions and most of the combatants here are very very worn out over the subject.


That's understandable, of course. Still, if the discussion has been going on for that long, I'm surprised that there aren't any "canonical" posts laying out the pros and cons and fleshing out the arguments that people can reference when the questions arise anew. Then again, not all discussions reach that level of quality.



R-T-B said:


> In my eyes, crypto is a very mundane but good thing that has a lot of people up in arms for reasons even they don't fully understand.


That, though, is a statement I take issue with. Calling it mundane is ... I guess true to some extent, but at the same time it's a world-spanning economical construct beyond the control of any individual or group of individuals. That's hardly mundane. Also, how is it good? As a means of generating individual wealth, sure. But what about all its negative effects? Crypto mining represents a very significant portion of the world's energy consumption, which is largely produced through coal and natural gas, which, again, pollute our already messed-up planet. Cryptocurrencies are even fundamentally designed to require more computing power as time goes on, making increased pollution a de-facto requirement of continued operation (unless, of course, they come up with ASIC miners, but even with those, power consumption keeps going up). It is also, ultimately, yet another tool the wealthy and privileged can use to hoard wealth, keeping it out of circulation and thus harming both global and local economies. Those are just two of the major issues at hand. On an individual basis, I have no issue with overlooking things like this in order to make a buck if the scale is small enough. However, overlooking significant adverse effects like that on a larger scale, or in regard to a large-scale system like this, is something that for me doesn't add up.


moproblems99 said:


> Read: GPUs are (were) expensive.





R-T-B said:


> That's part of it.  There's also a group I think that just plain doesn't get the concept, and that irritates them to no end.
> 
> Then of course, there's those who are afflicted by both.


Well, obviously there's a lot of prejudice going around on both sides. I tend to see most crypto evangelists as naive technological utopians and libertarians with severely overblown ideas of what type of change technology can enact in the world and a significant blind spot to its ill effects. Case in point: crypto mining (of the traditional kind, at least) produces _nothing _of any actual worth (outside of the mutually-agreed-upon worth of the cryptocurrency, which is both volatile and, as most financial constructs, fictional*), while simultaneously causing significant and very much measurable harm to our planet. It also causes the reallocation of resources from other, more practically/socially useful uses of technology (say, folding@home for something mundane, or GPUs used for medical research). Oh, and the millions of tons of e-waste it'll be the cause of in a handful of years isn't exactly negligible either, as e-waste recycling is pretty much nonexistent even in Western countries, and PCBs in landfills leech chemicals and heavy metals even after ROHS was implemented.

Personally, I was lucky enough to buy a Fury X before the crypto craze made GPUs into gold mines, and haven't yet seen a reason to upgrade.  Unless I spend as much as I did 2 1/2 years ago again (at MSRP), I'm not getting any increase in performance, so why bother? I have defintely felt the mining craze FOMO, but ultimately decided that I didn't see any benefit from burning electricity for profit. Also, I feel that i "get the concept" of cryptocurrencies (I understand how they work in broad strokes, and I understand the logic behind most of the arguments made for them even if I disagree with them), but I hear far too much nuance-lacking evangelization of this "new tech" (that is arguably kinda new but mostly old), and see far too many flaws in the concept and far too much potential for adverse effects to see this as something worth investing in, let alone promoting. That's me personally, though. That doesn't mean I'm not open to arguments for how this might ultimately benefit the world - but so far, those arguments are few and far between.



*People like to make the argument that "it has a mutually agreed upon worth, so it produces something of value." This is a circular argument that collapses in on it self as all circular arguments do. Sure, there are other human activities that do this - the financial "industry" is flush with them - but they're generally rare, and, ultimately of extremely low worth to the world and society at large. And, in general, if an endeavor doesn't bring anything good to the world, while consuming significant resources, then it is by default _causing harm_ to the world.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 11, 2018)

I'll acknowledge the energy consumption problem, sorry if I acted dismissive towards you, just been a rough week.  

My argument has always been that the energy consumption side can be blamed more on Cryptos reliance on Proof of Work than the core blockchain tech itself.  I strongly believe with time it can be overcome to the benefit of all.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 11, 2018)

@Valantar , Regardless if we ever agree on anything, thank you for bringing intelligent conversation.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 11, 2018)

Valantar said:


> Sigh. I had a whole way-too-long post written up here, but decided to finish it today rather than post it last night. Lo and behold, the forum deletes my draft. Thanks, XenForo! I'll try to recreate it as best I can, I suppose.
> 
> 
> First off: claiming that I "support the oligarchy" based on a critical stance towards cryptocurrencies is pretty out there. I'm a staunch supporter of participatory democracy, but with enough pragmatism that I accept that representative democracy is also a necessity for a functioning society. I could go on about this, but frankly that's not at all relevant here. Also, I don't live in a country as corrupt as the US, so for most Americans I probably come off as naive, but here it's not naivete, just realism.
> ...



Once again, we've been over all of this, round and round. If you're unwilling to read it, as you admittedly are, then don't be surprised when we ignore most of what you say, and don't bring your righteous indignation about how this should be a "discussion." Don't chastise me for being unwilling to have a "discussion"... We've had a discussion. You missed it, and now you bring in the same points. We're tired of it. Moreover, your demeanor and condescending attitude will earn you nothing more than the same from me. I'd honestly love to talk about all of the things you mention here. But I won't give you the pleasure when your wall of text is peppered with ad hominids

We could talk about poli-sci and what crypto means in the broader spectrum all day long. Usually I like to, as it's what I spent ungodly amounts of money to study in college. But once again... we aren't going to agree. Ever. "Effective regulation, enforcement of rules, and predetermined democratic processes are necessary safeguards to _avoid _oligarchies" That statement right there says we are at opposite ends of the spectrum. We have an essential difference, and we can argue all we like, but we will never convince one another. And frankly, I really don't care whether you agree with me, so it's pointless. You force your opinion on others by demanding regulation in a system that is inherently and intentionally unregulated. You made some extremely broad and unfounded assumptions in your first post in this thread. Forgive me for not being receptive to someone who walks into the middle of a conversation, ridicules the speaker and makes a claim about his argument that is completely off-base, and demands his questions (that have already been discussed) be answered, or else the speaker is of questionable intelligence. 


No wonder, huh?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 11, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> That's part of it.  There's also a group I think that just plain doesn't get the concept, and that irritates them to no end.


And there's people that do understand the concept and know it just leads to speculative bubbles, like Jamie Dimon.




R-T-B said:


> My argument has always been that the energy consumption side can be blamed more on Cryptos reliance on Proof of Work than the core blockchain tech itself.  I strongly believe with time it can be overcome to the benefit of all.


This seems to be a misconception on the pro-crypto side: blockchain code doesn't need cryptocurrencies to function.  Cryptocurrencies are financial instruments used to justify the existence of (and raise capital for) a specific blockchain.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 11, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Once again, we've been over all of this, round and round. If you're unwilling to read it, as you admittedly are, then don't be surprised when we ignore most of what you say, and don't bring your righteous indignation about how this should be a "discussion." Don't chastise me for being unwilling to have a "discussion"... We've had a discussion. You missed it, and now you bring in the same points. We're tired of it. Moreover, your demeanor and condescending attitude will earn you nothing more than the same from me. I'd honestly love to talk about all of the things you mention here. But I won't give you the pleasure when your wall of text is peppered with ad hominids
> 
> We could talk about poli-sci and what crypto means in the broader spectrum all day long. Usually I like to, as it's what I spent ungodly amounts of money to study in college. But once again... we aren't going to agree. Ever. "Effective regulation, enforcement of rules, and predetermined democratic processes are necessary safeguards to _avoid _oligarchies" That statement right there says we are at opposite ends of the spectrum. We have an essential difference, and we can argue all we like, but we will never convince one another. And frankly, I really don't care whether you agree with me, so it's pointless. You force your opinion on others by demanding regulation in a system that is inherently and intentionally unregulated. You made some extremely broad and unfounded assumptions in your first post in this thread. Forgive me for not being receptive to someone who walks into the middle of a conversation, ridicules the speaker and makes a claim about his argument that is completely off-base, and demands his questions (that have already been discussed) be answered, or else the speaker is of questionable intelligence.
> 
> ...



First off, ad hominems? Really? Where? Can you _please _quote me on something where I attack your character or motives rather than discuss the matter at hand? Yes, I "accuse" you of derailing the discussion and using rhetorical devices to distract from the matter at hand - but I also clearly show what I mean by this, and quote you directly. I also ask you to please not project your insecurity onto me. I suppose you could read that as a personal attack given that I don't know you at all and don't have anything beyond your posts on which to have an impression of whether you are insecure about something, but again, that was a statement directed specifically at you accusing me of somehow "forcing my opinion on you". Given that there is no way whatsoever for me to force my opinion on you through the internet, I'd say reading that as projection of insecurity is really not that big a leap. If you have another explanation, I'd love to hear it, and I'll gladly apologize if you can somehow argue that I was actually in the wrong. Still, neither are personal attacks, but rather calling you out on behaviour and rhetoric that I find objectionable on a forum. Your behaviour and rhetoric is not your character or person - it's a choice. I explain how your way of arguing makes you come off to someone on the other side of the discussion. Was I a bit harsh? Perhaps, but considering that (as shown above) you were going to quite some length to shut down me asking questions, I feel that was warranted. As I said: if you're tired of the topic, you don't need to participate. That doesn't give you the right to tell me to stop asking questions. If you wanted to actually make me stop asking questions, you could link me to something that you feel answers them. After all, you've been a part of the discussion far longer than me (and from your "Cryptocurrency Expert" badge, I take it you're well-versed on this topic), and should thus have a much better overview of it than I could possibly get even if I spent days reading both old and new topics here. I'm not saying you have to, but that would be the pragmatic and productive way of handling this. Your approach is instead hostile and domineering.

Also, you keep underscoring how you're unwilling to discuss a topic with someone who has a diametrically opposite view of yours. That is, again, your right, but also too bad. I'd like to hear what you have to say. An exchange of _differing_ opinions is how we can learn and develop our views, after all. If you view a discussion of a topic only as worthwhile if it is an opportunity to "convince each other", then that's a rather fatalist view. I hope you'll consider revising that. As for my more general political views, it's good to see that you also see how approaches to specific subjects reflect larger views, but again, seeing significant disagreement as a reason to stop talking is ... depressing to me. I personally find libertarianism both naive and paradoxical in a significant number of ways, but that doesn't mean I'm unwilling to talk politely and on-topic to libertarians, nor that I refrain from on-topic discussion of their arguments.

Also, when did I walk into a conversation and ridicule someone? My initial post here was a general statement (mostly in tune with the tone and direction of the discussion at the time) aimed at nobody in particular (outside of the thoroughly corrupt and enormously harmful financial industry, which being an industry is not any one member (or group of members) on this forum). The point when you seemed to take serious issue with my reasoning was a while later when I took the time to present an argument at greater length and with my reasoning expanded upon, around post #191. You said the reason for this was that I quoted you directly, which ... is kind of what you do on a forum? Also, that quote was an _entirely_ on-topic response to an argument you presented that I disagree with. My argument presented an example of why. You refused to respond, instead focusing on that you couldn't be bothered. You also said those arguments had already been discussed, yet I still can't find anything resembling a fleshed-out discussion of that topic in this thread, nor references to it existing anywhere else (besides repeated claims that it's been done before). I don't have any doubt whatsoever that the topic has been covered before - and it'll probably arise all over again every few days or week on this forum (not to mention everywhere else!) for the foreseeable future. Still, though, that doesn't in any way mean that the topic is "done". You have every right to be tired of it, or "done with it" personally, but you don't have the right to ask me to stop asking questions.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 11, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> This seems to be a misconception on the pro-crypto side: blockchain code doesn't need cryptocurrencies to function.



I didn't say it did.

Frankly, I still like the idea of cryptocurrency, and believe a peer to peer currency like that controlled by the masses to be a good thing.  It's present implementation just has some (fairly major) issues.


----------



## Valantar (Jun 11, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> I'll acknowledge the energy consumption problem, sorry if I acted dismissive towards you, just been a rough week.
> 
> My argument has always been that the energy consumption side can be blamed more on Cryptos reliance on Proof of Work than the core blockchain tech itself.  I strongly believe with time it can be overcome to the benefit of all.


No problem at all, we all have outside lives that affect our moods and tone 

I agree with your second-to-last sentence, by the way. Frankly, I haven't looked into how necessary the proof-of-work model is for cryptocurrencies in general (though of course I know that there are alternatives that work in different ways), but my impression is that this is the most common as this is the easiest way to ensure that people can still mine, which serves to shore up a user base and group of supporters for that currency. Proof-of-work is still a system purposely designed to burn electricity at ever-increasing rates. It may very well be that crypto will broadly move away from PoW in time, but I also have the impression that the idea of this upsets a large portion of the user base, and new currencies capitalize on this by "swooping in" and presenting an alternative that still uses PoW, allowing for easy mining. If this keeps happening, then the situation won't ever improve.

Still, this brings me back to the quetion of "what exactly is blockchain tech", which hardly anyone can seem to agree on. After all, most if not all of its core components existed before Bitcoin and "blockchain tech" were ever invented, and the discussion seems to always return back to which specific combination of technologies and features are necessary to still call it blockchain while also being useful (outside of generating a fictional tradeable commodity, which only brings us back to the circular arguments) and not intrinsically harmful (at least to the environment). Then again, that is either an extremely high-level discussion which requires true expert knowledge of the subject, or more likely beyond the scope of a topic like this. It would be extremely interesting if someone had that knowledge, though.


moproblems99 said:


> @Valantar , Regardless if we ever agree on anything, thank you for bringing intelligent conversation.


Thanks


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 11, 2018)

Well, Blockchain is actually defined and preceded bitcoin.  Bitcoin just popularized it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockchain

I'm more a fan of the idea of "peer to peer currency" honesty, AKA cryptocurrency.


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 11, 2018)

Valantar said:


> First off, ad hominems? Really? Where? Can you _please _quote me on something where I attack your character or motives rather than discuss the matter at hand? Yes, I "accuse" you of derailing the discussion and using rhetorical devices to distract from the matter at hand - but I also clearly show what I mean by this, and quote you directly. I also ask you to please not project your insecurity onto me. I suppose you could read that as a personal attack given that I don't know you at all and don't have anything beyond your posts on which to have an impression of whether you are insecure about something, but again, that was a statement directed specifically at you accusing me of somehow "forcing my opinion on you". Given that there is no way whatsoever for me to force my opinion on you through the internet, I'd say reading that as projection of insecurity is really not that big a leap. If you have another explanation, I'd love to hear it, and I'll gladly apologize if you can somehow argue that I was actually in the wrong. Still, neither are personal attacks, but rather calling you out on behaviour and rhetoric that I find objectionable on a forum. Your behaviour and rhetoric is not your character or person - it's a choice. I explain how your way of arguing makes you come off to someone on the other side of the discussion. Was I a bit harsh? Perhaps, but considering that (as shown above) you were going to quite some length to shut down me asking questions, I feel that was warranted. As I said: if you're tired of the topic, you don't need to participate. That doesn't give you the right to tell me to stop asking questions. If you wanted to actually make me stop asking questions, you could link me to something that you feel answers them. After all, you've been a part of the discussion far longer than me (and from your "Cryptocurrency Expert" badge, I take it you're well-versed on this topic), and should thus have a much better overview of it than I could possibly get even if I spent days reading both old and new topics here. I'm not saying you have to, but that would be the pragmatic and productive way of handling this. Your approach is instead hostile and domineering.
> 
> Also, you keep underscoring how you're unwilling to discuss a topic with someone who has a diametrically opposite view of yours. That is, again, your right, but also too bad. I'd like to hear what you have to say. An exchange of _differing_ opinions is how we can learn and develop our views, after all. If you view a discussion of a topic only as worthwhile if it is an opportunity to "convince each other", then that's a rather fatalist view. I hope you'll consider revising that. As for my more general political views, it's good to see that you also see how approaches to specific subjects reflect larger views, but again, seeing significant disagreement as a reason to stop talking is ... depressing to me. I personally find libertarianism both naive and paradoxical in a significant number of ways, but that doesn't mean I'm unwilling to talk politely and on-topic to libertarians, nor that I refrain from on-topic discussion of their arguments.
> 
> Also, when did I walk into a conversation and ridicule someone? My initial post here was a general statement (mostly in tune with the tone and direction of the discussion at the time) aimed at nobody in particular (outside of the thoroughly corrupt and enormously harmful financial industry, which being an industry is not any one member (or group of members) on this forum). The point when you seemed to take serious issue with my reasoning was a while later when I took the time to present an argument at greater length and with my reasoning expanded upon, around post #191. You said the reason for this was that I quoted you directly, which ... is kind of what you do on a forum? Also, that quote was an _entirely_ on-topic response to an argument you presented that I disagree with. My argument presented an example of why. You refused to respond, instead focusing on that you couldn't be bothered. You also said those arguments had already been discussed, yet I still can't find anything resembling a fleshed-out discussion of that topic in this thread, nor references to it existing anywhere else (besides repeated claims that it's been done before). I don't have any doubt whatsoever that the topic has been covered before - and it'll probably arise all over again every few days or week on this forum (not to mention everywhere else!) for the foreseeable future. Still, though, that doesn't in any way mean that the topic is "done". You have every right to be tired of it, or "done with it" personally, but you don't have the right to ask me to stop asking questions.



Look... you started off your conversation in this thread quoting me directly, and taking a HUGE liberty with what I said. Moreover, you had a condescending and dismissive tone about it. ("Oh the old argument. .... ") 

You're perfectly free to discuss what you wish, in this thread or wherever you like. I've never said you couldn't or shouldn't. But once again, YOU quoted ME. YOU are talking directly to ME. You are demanding answers of ME. So I'll tell you again, I'm personally tired of reiterating the same thing over and over. If you want someone else to do that, go right ahead. I've no problem with you discussing what you will. But now, you've called my intelligence into question simply because I refuse to answer your questions. So don't call ME hostile and domineering. You are demanding something of me, and calling me stupid for not answering you. Scroll all the way back to the first part of our conversation:



Papahyooie said:


> I agree completely. You're free to discuss as you please. I don't see the discussion as finished at all. But you quoted me directly, right after I had said that we were going to go back to the beginning of the conversation. I simply said that I was correct in the assumption.



Never once did I attempt to stop you from discussing any subject or nuance you wished. In fact, I made that very clear from the beginning. 

So yea, continue rocking on your little plastic horse about how high it is.



Valantar said:


> First off, ad hominems? Really? Where? .... Also, when did I walk into a conversation and ridicule someone?





Valantar said:


> are you having issues with people questioning the foundations of your convictions?





Valantar said:


> Ah, yes. The classic "regulation and laws are pointless as people are far too corrupt to ever uphold them" argument





Valantar said:


> insecurity





Valantar said:


> meaningless rhetorical trick





Valantar said:


> closed-minded and domineering



The second quote there about regulation and laws, shows me you aren't interested in hearing my opinion at all, but only in misinterpreting it and ridiculing it. By first off quoting something I never said and attributing it to me, then characterizing it as a tired and clearly-debunked theory, you have characterized me as unlearned through your rhetoric. This is the basis of an ad hominem, though sly and eloquent was its delivery. 

Once again, we can talk about it all we want... but you don't want to talk. You never did, not from the beginning. You either misunderstand, or mischaracterize what I say. You're still doing it, even as we argue this nonsense. You're more interested in making me look bad. 

You want what's already been discussed from my point of view? Here's the cliff-notes version:

A currency controlled by its users is not susceptible to manipulation by an oligarchy, as it can be cast off by those who support it, and alternatives adopted. 
Crypto can evolve to better suit users and the market, whereas a government controlled currency cannot. It can only serve the whim of those who control it. 
Those who wish to regulate and control crypto have no inherent right to do so. Any attempt to do so is aggression and use of force. 
To directly answer the question in the OP: Crypto CAN be the future. It must be adopted as a currency and not only as a speculative gambling tool. This is a conundrum, as in order for that to happen, it needs stability, and in order to have stability, it must be adopted. 
Crypto, as it is today, is NOT the future. 
Crypto, evolved to better suit the market and its use, is, as long as statists do not consolidate force in order to stop it (unless individualists consolidate force to keep it alive, which is highly unlikely. ) 

You'll of course have all sorts of reasons why that's all wrong. And once again... we will be back to page 2... as I said all along.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 12, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Frankly, I still like the idea of cryptocurrency, and believe a peer to peer currency like that controlled by the masses to be a good thing.  It's present implementation just has some (fairly major) issues.


Ah, he comes out and says it!

Those "issues" will never be fixed.  There's no way to build enough intelligence into the blockchain to automatically correct for all the factors a currency needs to correct for.  Blockchain can only serve as a means to an end (like any technology), not a means and an end.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 12, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ah, he comes out and says it!
> 
> Those "issues" will never be fixed.  There's no way to build enough intelligence into the blockchain to automatically correct for all the factors a currency needs to correct for.  Blockchain can only serve as a means to an end (like any technology), not a means and an end.



For the record, RTB has maintained for quite a while the current implementations of crypto flawed....nearly every crypto thread.



Valantar said:


> Thanks



Like everyone else, said if you were here earlier, discussion would have been much better.  However, while energy consumption is real, I still dismiss it as a cause for hating crypto because I would imagine that gaming is nearly on par with wasteful energy use.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jun 12, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> For the record, RTB has maintained for quite a while the current implementations of crypto flawed....nearly every crypto thread.


Well, yeah, but he's also believes in this fantasy that cryptocurrency will replace fiat currency.  It won't.  Fiat will continue to get more digitized but exchanges will mostly occur via trusted servers, not peer to peer.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 12, 2018)

I don't think many people believe it is going to replace it, that is asinine.  Best case is to supplement.

Edit:  On a side note, I would not be surprised if crypto went digital someday - in its officially supported forms, of course.  If we don't blow our selves up first.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 12, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Ah, he comes out and says it!



I've always said it.



> Those "issues" will never be fixed.



I really don't agree that the outlook is that pessimistic.  You should know better than to be that certain, for that matter.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Well, yeah, but he's also believes in this fantasy that cryptocurrency will replace fiat currency.



No, not really.  I believe it has the POTENTIAL to some day do so.  Being certain is another matter entirely.

It's more a pipe dream utopian vision at this point than a attainable thing, but I hold out hope.


----------



## hat (Jun 12, 2018)

@Valantar did make one good point against cryptocurrency, which even I as a crypto supporter will admit to. The fact that it is controlled by the people, that is, your general average person, is both a good and a bad thing. The private sector isn't all rainbows and sunshine... and I believe crypto is likely manipulated by a few power players. It has been and will continue to be as long as it exists in the current model. Sure, the little guy like you or me can still find it useful, but the true ideology of cryptocurrency can never see the light of day as long as it exists in its current state, and it may never, so long as any one person, or group of people, can own a large enough amount of it on their own to shift the market their way.

I've admitted many times I jumped in it when I was aware I could use it as a way to make some extra money. My thought process at the time was little else beyond "mine cryptocurrency and get paid". Sure, I'd love to see crypto become what it was meant to be from the start, but I don't see it happening. Not as long as it can be controlled by any official institution such as a government, or by people in general. Of course, the idea was for it to be controlled by the people instead of the government, but I believe for it to be anything close to what it was meant to be, it still has to be controlled by one person, or a small group. Of course, the problem with that is, a lot of powerful people probably won't like that, and no matter how trustworthy those people may be, they can still be influenced in one way or another, or the system itself could be attacked...

Call me a pessimist, but I think the idea of this currency that's controlled by the people instead of the government is doomed to fail, no matter which way you spin it. And that's not the fault of any technology or ideology. You can trace that one straight back to plain old human greed. It's a very difficult thing to beat...


----------



## Valantar (Jun 12, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Look... you started off your conversation in this thread quoting me directly, and taking a HUGE liberty with what I said. Moreover, you had a condescending and dismissive tone about it. ("Oh the old argument. .... ")
> 
> You're perfectly free to discuss what you wish, in this thread or wherever you like. I've never said you couldn't or shouldn't. But once again, YOU quoted ME. YOU are talking directly to ME. You are demanding answers of ME. So I'll tell you again, I'm personally tired of reiterating the same thing over and over. If you want someone else to do that, go right ahead. I've no problem with you discussing what you will. But now, you've called my intelligence into question simply because I refuse to answer your questions. So don't call ME hostile and domineering. You are demanding something of me, and calling me stupid for not answering you. Scroll all the way back to the first part of our conversation:
> 
> ...


First off: I'll gladly apologize for this post. I obviously went a few steps to far there. Not that it's an excuse, but I was rather pissed off about your response to a clear and concise argument being utterly dismissive and condescending. I guess we can both do that. I still shouldn't have let that knee-jerk reaction be posted, though. You say you were tired of arguing the same points over and over again at that point. That's fine. My issue is that you didn't actually react until I tried to take the discussion to an actually productive level, presenting actual arguments. I understand that seeing a post like that for you might trigger the "here we go again..." response. Still, your response was neither productive or polite, nor did it serve to bring the discussion forward in any way. Sadly, I can't find anything related to the arguments I presented there on page 2 of this thread - or any page, really.

The problem is, you said you never tried to stop me discussing anything. What, then, was the point of this post?

Also, you're right that I quoted you first. I quoted this post and responded with a simple, entirely on-topic counterargument. You responded to that with, essentially, "here we go again." Is it any wonder that I take issue with that?

I'll also gladly admit that


Valantar said:


> Ah, yes. The classic "regulation and laws are pointless as people are far too corrupt to ever uphold them" argument.


is rather flippant, and I could have used a much better tone there. But for the remainder of that post, I explain exactly why I disagree with you and that line of argumentation. Once again, you never address that afterwards. Of course, this does boil down to our seemingly diametrically opposed political views, which could easily lead the entire discussion off-topic. It's still entirely possible to keep it on-topic while responding to my arguments, though, yet you haven't until now.



Papahyooie said:


> So yea, continue rocking on your little plastic horse about how high it is.


Seriously? Wow. Okay then.

But back to the core of your argument here:


Papahyooie said:


> But now, you've called my intelligence into question simply because I refuse to answer your questions. So don't call ME hostile and domineering. You are demanding something of me, and calling me stupid for not answering you.


Have I called your intelligence into question? No. I've said that your tone and wholesale dismissal of even the possibility of discussing this subject is a bad approach to this (and any) discussion. I probably did use the word "stupid" about it, but if so, that's not a characterization of _you _but _your way of arguing_. Those are not the same thing. Saying "your tone and way of arguing is stupid" is not the same as saying "you are stupid." I have also questioned your motivations to some degree, but we've pretty much cleared that up by now: you were tired of doing what to you is rehashing the same old arguments. As for me "accusing you" of projecting your insecurity onto me when describing arguing against you as


Papahyooie said:


> you want to force your opinions on others.


I'd still call that a reasonable reading of that response to my post. Outside of personal insecurity, I really can see no reasonable way that me arguing against you can be read as "forcing my opinion on you" (unless I were to ... say, stalk you in real life while yelling arguments at you, it would be exceptionally hard for me to force an opinion on you). If you still disagree, I'll gladly hear why, and of course I'll accept any other reasonable explanation for using that formulation.






Papahyooie said:


> You want what's already been discussed from my point of view? Here's the cliff-notes version:


Well, at least I'm happy we're more or less back to actually discussing the matter at hand.



Papahyooie said:


> A currency controlled by its users is not susceptible to manipulation by an oligarchy, as it can be cast off by those who support it, and alternatives adopted.


How, exactly, is it not susceptible to manipulation? Can the oligarchy not simply become users, or pay multitudes of people to become users? And unless there are very specific checks to power involved (including monitoring systems and some sort of "police" to enforce sanctions on abusers), do they not generally have the resources/means to become very significant users, at least if ownership of a good (cryptocurrency in this case) is the key/sole determinant of who has power? Unless the system is arranged so that you only have one vote no matter how much currency you hold (which is a fundamental principle of democracy, even if it's been significantly undermined in the US), it's fundamentally antidemocratic and a red carpet invitation to the oligarchy. Some would argue that that would be an illiberal system (as it forces a form of equality onto users), but is not the alternative significantly more illiberal, telling users their vote counts less than others' simply due to their lack of wealth/resources (which is again largely determined by where and when you were born and to whom)? This, as I see it, is one of the key paradoxes of libertarianism: that most libertarians refuse to see that without checks on accumulation of power, power _will_ be accumulated by those with the means to do so - and this will inevitaby lead to _less freedom_ for those with less means.


Papahyooie said:


> Crypto can evolve to better suit users and the market, whereas a government controlled currency cannot. It can only serve the whim of those who control it.


You're not factually wrong, but miss a key point: "Those who control it" are, in a functioning democracy, _the people_. Of course, various forms of democracy have various in-between stages (representatives and hired government officials of various kinds) but ultimately, in a well-functioning system what these intermediates decide is an attempt at an optimal interpretation of the will of the voters (who rarely agree, so compromise is necessary), informed and regulated by experts in the field. A key thing here is that - at least in a reasonably non-corrupt society - greed (or, to be nice, "profit motivation") does not play a part in government reasoning. The government does not exist to make a profit, but to ensure a stable and functioning society. To the contrary, any "free market" (as in an unregulated one) is dominated by profit-seeking forces, which makes greed and personal/corporate profit the chief determinant of the direction of these markets. That only benefits those in power - and unlike democratically elected officials, the people have _no means whatsoever_ to remove these people from power if they're hurting them. You can't vote a greedy CEO out of office, after all, even if he makes a living by harming other people.


Papahyooie said:


> Those who wish to regulate and control crypto have no inherent right to do so. Any attempt to do so is aggression and use of force.


That is a very interesting argument, which, again, boils down to your fundamental view of how to best organize a society for the optimal well-being of its people. I would counter that in any society, a governing body elected by the people seeking to ensure the well-being of the populace has the right to regulate and control more or less anything that has the potential to destabilize any significant part of that society. I'd even say that this is one of the key prerogatives of government: regulating and curbing forces that individuals can never hope to control themselves. Economics is a significant part of any society. As for calling it "aggression" and "use of force" simply shows that you view the government purely as an adversary, and doesn't really add to this argument, outside of underlining your denial of the possibility of a non-adversarial government. Which is another matter entirely.


Papahyooie said:


> To directly answer the question in the OP: Crypto CAN be the future. It must be adopted as a currency and not only as a speculative gambling tool. This is a conundrum, as in order for that to happen, it needs stability, and in order to have stability, it must be adopted.


I agree completely with the second sentence if cryptocurrencies (and not blockchain tech) is ever to have any real utility. The issue is that achieving that alongside the existence of largely-deregulated global investment banks is ... well, impossible. Investors speculate (i.e. gamble) in _anything and everything_. Commodities trading literally amounts to buying and selling (virtually, without it ever moving or changing hands) _whatever _stuff you can get your hands on at a mind-boggling pace to eke out profits by serving as an intermediary in the otherwise necessary movement of these commodities. If something is for sale, it is likely already being speculated on. The only thing that can curb this is regulation of the financial sector, as telling them "can you please not speculate in Bitcoin" isn't going to help much. Of course, for cryptocurrencies, that aren't actually goods that need to move around and change hands for reasons relating to their own existence (say, factories needing supplies to produce things, or people needing food to live) can simply say "our currency is not available to buy and sell". Of course, that would be regulation, and would require some sort of system to uphold it. And it would cause serious trouble for the actual use of this currency (if you can't buy it, how do you obtain it? If you can't sell it, how do you buy anything with it?). There's also the issue of mining and proof-of-work: is that a necessary component of cryptocurrencies, and if it is, how can we maintain crypto while avoiding doing lasting harm to our planet? What good is a deregulated currency if we're enduring a global extinction event that threatens the ecosystems that we rely on to live?


Papahyooie said:


> Crypto, as it is today, is NOT the future.


Agreed.


Papahyooie said:


> Crypto, evolved to better suit the market and its use, is, as long as statists do not consolidate force in order to stop it (unless individualists consolidate force to keep it alive, which is highly unlikely. )


I doubt "statists" will do any such thing (as that would imply some sort of trans-ideological grassroots movement among people who believe in government oversight (which is common to the vast majority of ideologies, just in various ways), which is highly unlikely), but (over?)protective national governments (through their officials) might. Given the volatility of global markets (ironically largely _caused _by lack of oversight and adversarial/protectionist stances by said governments), letting a supranational economic structure gain significant power in a society is something most people are wary of. As they ought to be, really. It can be quite easily argued that wide-spread adoption of crypto in commerce and day-to-day economics would be fundamentally antidemocratic, as it would a) remove voting rights for non-property holders (at least in this field), b) mean that people all over the globe have power over places they don't live, work or have any other relation to, and c) open the door to corporate, for-profit control of the economic building blocks of said society.

For the record: I'm actually quite a proponent of a global, supranational currency - it comes with my belief that we need a global, supranational government (democratically elected, of course, the specifics of which I do not even have the slightest clue of how would work) to avoid conflict and exploitation and ensure an effective and fair society in as many places as possible. I just don't believe that cryptocurrencies have the potential to be this, as they don't seem to be built with the necessary structures to avoid consolidation of power from wealth, and thus for-profit abuse.



Papahyooie said:


> You'll of course have all sorts of reasons why that's all wrong. And once again... we will be back to page 2... as I said all along.


Well, yes, as you have probably seen already, I do indeed. However, isn't that what we call a discussion? And no, we aren't back to page 2 - the only real similarity I can find between that post where you first said that, now, and page 2 (and thereabouts) is that they're generally related to the topic of this thread. As such, I suppose you're kind of right, but isn't that also where this discussion ought to be?



moproblems99 said:


> I don't think many people believe it is going to replace it, that is asinine.  Best case is to supplement.


This is indeed a common misconception, though one that affects pretty much any tech that rises to significance in society: that people think it will supplant (and thus remove) whatever came before it. Outside of ... Betamax and HD-DVD?, I can't really think of a single case where this has actually happened. Digital documents haven't replaced books or paper documents, but supplemented and nuanced their use. While cell phones have almost entirely replaced landlines (at least here in Norway), they're still phones. One could argue that texting and IM of various kinds has taken over, but those haven't in any way removed voice calls. And so on, and so on. Generally, all inventions supplement each other, and outright replacement is very rare indeed.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 12, 2018)

wow "14 Quotes" and The great wall of China of Text
Guys get a Room and use Crypto to pay for it or Take it to PM's
IS someone going for post QuoteMaster badge


----------



## Papahyooie (Jun 12, 2018)

Valantar said:


> First off: I'll gladly apologize for this post. I obviously went a few steps to far there. Not that it's an excuse, but I was rather pissed off about your response to a clear and concise argument being utterly dismissive and condescending. I guess we can both do that. I still shouldn't have let that knee-jerk reaction be posted, though. You say you were tired of arguing the same points over and over again at that point. That's fine. My issue is that you didn't actually react until I tried to take the discussion to an actually productive level, presenting actual arguments. I understand that seeing a post like that for you might trigger the "here we go again..." response. Still, your response was neither productive or polite, nor did it serve to bring the discussion forward in any way. Sadly, I can't find anything related to the arguments I presented there on page 2 of this thread - or any page, really.
> 
> The problem is, you said you never tried to stop me discussing anything. What, then, was the point of this post?
> 
> ...



I say that you force your opinion on others, not in this thread, but through your belief in regulation in general. The fact that you want to interfere in a consensual transaction between myself and another person, using the force of aggressive government, IS inherently you forcing your opinion on me. If I want to participate in a marketplace and use a currency that could result in whatever bad result you want to prevent, that is my prerogative.

If I want to buy apples from Bill, and Bill wants to sell me apples, and we want to use rocks as our currency, neither you nor anyone else has an inherent right to interfere with that transaction.  The fact that you want regulation means you are necessarily infringing upon what amounts to a consensual transaction. THAT is what I mean by you forcing your opinion on me. That is why I say "If you don't want to use crypto, don't. Leave the ones who do alone." It has nothing to do with this thread, or whether I think we should discuss it. We want an unregulated, user-controlled currency system, for various practical and ideological reasons. Crypto enables this in a way that has never been feasible before. It's in its infancy yes. But that doesn't change the fact that you disagreeing with whether an unregulated currency is good or not is absolutely, 100% irrelevant. It does not involve you. What I do involves me, and the persons with whom I deal. If you think crypto is bad, or won't work, or whatever... then don't use it. That's your prerogative. But it gives you absolutely no right to govern what I do, as long as those dealings are with others who consent to the transactions.

This is why I said the question in the OP is flawed. It's not a rhetorical trick, you just don't understand the nuance that I'm getting at. Crypto can be the future for those that want it. I am not saying that to shut down discussion. I am saying that, because I believe that consent is the basis for all human interaction. If I do something involving another person, and that person does not consent, I have committed a crime, and am now under purview of society and government. But if I am dealing only with myself and consenting parties, you and society as a whole, have no dominion, nor right to interfere.

You disagree, obviously. You believe that society has a right to intervene. This is a violation of consent, and an aggression. Bill and I consent to our apples and rocks deal. We do not consent to Bob the Mayor telling us we cannot use rocks, or that we can only use specific rocks, or that the rocks have to be polished to a smooth surface so that nobody gets cut by a rock. Our deal has nothing to do with Bob, or Sally, or the rest of the town. If I sell Bill fake apples and defraud him, then it becomes the domain of government and society because I have violated consent.

This of course, leads into my next point (that I've made several times already, but like I said... here we are again.... this sub-forum, being made up of a small group of users mainly, has much context that cannot be gleaned from this single thread, I will admit. But that doesn't change the fact that mostly everyone here actively in discussion except you already has this context. You admittedly refuse to do the reading required to gain it. This is why I am generally irked by your tirade about how I refuse to debate you. I've paid my dues to this group here, and the conversation. You have not.)

Anyway... next point... crypto (and any distributed system, really) is inherently resistant to control, even in the case that a group of users become the dominant forces, *because* of consent. If manipulation occurs by a de-facto oligarchy of users with a large amount of power... other users can simply leave to an alternative. This is unlike a government-backed currency, which is forced upon us. Those group of people who control the federal reserve and other national banks like it, the economies are their playthings. There is no consent involved. It is the definition of an oligarchy (which is why I made the joke at Ford's expense... I can't speak for Ford, but we have a long history of disagreeing on everything, and I fancy we have established a rapport that that's the way it is... You and I, not so much...)

If the "whales" as the oligarchy is called in crypto, become too entrenched for the masses of users to tolerate, we can leave to alternatives. This is happening as we speak. Bitcoin will die soon, as the arbiter of crypto in general. The signs are there, we're just in the growing pains of it. The hope is, of course, that users move to better evolved alternatives, and not out of crypto completely. This may or may not happen. We are near the crossroads of crypto dying or being revived. We can speculate as to which it will be, but nobody knows for sure. But the point is that we CAN. This cannot be said for state-backed currencies. And I say that in the colloquial sense, as crypto is also state-backed, in the purest sense of a state being a group of people aligning. But crypto is backed by a non-aggressive state.



Valantar said:


> I just don't believe that cryptocurrencies have the potential to be this, as they don't seem to be built with the necessary structures to avoid consolidation of power from wealth, and thus for-profit abuse.



This statement describes fiat currency, backed by a state that is the very epitome of consolidation of power from wealth, and for-profit abuse, not crypto. The ONLY system that has a built-in potential to resist this, is one that is necessarily voluntary. Crypto is that. Your arguments assume that a government, literally built upon the consolidation of power from wealth, can somehow spawn a tool that resists such itself. This of course spawns from your faith in democracy, yet another example of a consolidation of power in the hands of a collective, with the express purpose of curtailing the actions of minorities. 

How you justify that logically, I'll never understand. But I have to remember that this is what they teach in school, and most people will never question those basic assumptions.



Sigh... I said I wasn't going to do this... and here I am again.


----------



## Kissamies (Jun 12, 2018)

No I don't. I was surprised that the 2014 toy money craziness wasn't the last.


----------



## R-T-B (Jun 12, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> wow "14 Quotes" and The great wall of China of Text



Dorset, with all due respect, real discussion on this is a good thing and no one is forcing you to read it...



Chloe Price said:


> No I don't. I was surprised that the 2014 toy money craziness wasn't the last.



Honestly, I’m very much betting we’ll see it again soon.  Mark my words.


----------



## hat (Jun 12, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Honestly, I’m very much betting we’ll see it again soon.  Mark my words.



I'm hoping we do. My little stash of BTC isn't helping me at all right now. I wanted to use it to pay for some new computer parts, but that's gonna be hard when the price of BTC keeps going down. Of course I'm not new to this game and I know it could very well shoot back up...


----------



## moproblems99 (Jun 12, 2018)

dorsetknob said:


> wow "14 Quotes" and The great wall of China of Text
> Guys get a Room and use Crypto to pay for it or Take it to PM's
> IS someone going for post QuoteMaster badge



I would agree with you if it was off topic but generally, it is on topic and mostly civil.  I am honestly floored there were people that up-voted that....what the heck is the point of the forum if people are told to take it to PM.  Double post, get yelled at, quote - get yelled at.  Damned if you do and damned if you don't some days, I guess.


----------



## MatGrow (Aug 4, 2018)

It's future. Before starting any investment you should learn the crypto market and trace it's unstable mood.


----------



## verycharbroiled (Aug 28, 2018)

If you have money you can afford to lose, go ahead and invest a bit into crypto. Worst that will happen is you lose that amount of money. Best that can happen is you will make several times that amount of money. At the very least you will enjoy the ride. Well probably enjoy the ride. At least I have. As always only invest what you can afford to lose.

This is new technology. As such no one really knows where it will go. And that's half the fun. I got into it for the tech. And that was in 2011. Nowadays it seems most people into it for the profit. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but that's not what this is really about in my opinion. It's the great experiment and I am enjoying being part of it.


----------



## yotano211 (Aug 28, 2018)

MatGrow said:


> It's future. Before starting any investment you should learn the crypto market and trace it's unstable mood.


crypto is not an investment, its a piece of technology that a few people turned it to in a gambling style investment.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 28, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> crypto is not an investment, its a piece of technology that a few people turned it to in a gambling style investment.



Don't those both kinda contain the word "investment?"

I don't think anyone believes it's a safe or predictable one, for sure..


----------



## trog100 (Aug 28, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Don't those both kinda contain the word "investment?"
> 
> I don't think anyone believes it's a safe or predictable one, for sure..



bitcoin has just pushed above $7000 again and gold just above  $1200.. i can remember reading not all that long ago that one bitcoin was worth more than an ounce of gold.. 

bitcoin dosnt look too bad if the silly manic highs are ignored.. 

trog


----------



## yotano211 (Aug 28, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Don't those both kinda contain the word "investment?"
> 
> I don't think anyone believes it's a safe or predictable one, for sure..


Lots of people believed that in was some kind of investment so they put lots of their money into it. And a lot of them lost big time and others gained.
I meet about a dozen people in person who told me that it would always increase. A few of them invested into ASIC machines and got rid of their GPUs for cheap to me. I bought them and started mining alt-coins with them.


----------



## Vya Domus (Aug 28, 2018)

trog100 said:


> bitcoin dosnt look too bad if the silly manic highs are ignored..



Every serious investor would cringe if they would hear, "Hey, this is pretty good, just ignore the manic highs."

And that's why crypto will just sort of hang in there, ostracized from other investments. I heard lot of rich man say that they are not interested in crypto whether it was at a high or when it plummeted, either it's all a conspiracy so they can get rich unbeknown to us or they know better.

I've been thinking, what if crypto is mostly used by the average Joe looking to get rich and most don't have a damn clue as to what they're doing. It would explain a lot, including the manic highs. I no longer think crypto is an bad investment inherently, ironically what seems to make it a bad is actually the people screwing with it.


----------



## Papahyooie (Aug 28, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> crypto is not an investment, its a piece of technology that a few people turned it to in a gambling style investment.



I don't mean this to be mean, and it's not directed at you, but more just directed at the general public...  but if you think that ANY stock investment of any kind is not a gamble to some extent, then you probably shouldn't invest.


----------



## yotano211 (Aug 28, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> I don't mean this to be mean, and it's not directed at you, but more just directed at the general public...  but if you think that ANY stock investment of any kind is not a gamble to some extent, then you probably shouldn't invest.


The stock market can also be gambling but not all stocks are like that. Most stocks are backed up by companies with history of growth or decline and over 100 years of research. 
Most crypto coins turned out to be in the order of some kind of fraud. Overall I think crypto is pure crap but the technology behind crypto is going to be the real magic.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 28, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> Lots of people believed that in was some kind of investment so they put lots of their money into it. And a lot of them lost big time and others gained.
> I meet about a dozen people in person who told me that it would always increase. A few of them invested into ASIC machines and got rid of their GPUs for cheap to me. I bought them and started mining alt-coins with them.



You never heard the phrase "high risk investment?"

It should be treated as such.


----------



## yotano211 (Aug 28, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> You never heard the phrase "high risk investment?"
> 
> It should be treated as such.


yea its called the OTC.


----------



## Canon (Aug 28, 2018)

In direct response to thread title; as it stands, absolutley not, until there is a truly user friendly globally adopted wallet that allows daily transactions with little more input than a few taps on a device. To us, creating and using a wallet is easy, quick, normal. Think of those people that struggle to understand how hashtags work on Instagram, they're (unfortunate as it may be) the market, they're the public, that's the group that's going to drive anything forward.

This would require a platform, as mentioned globally supported with constant work, minor tweaks and changes every hour of the day, much like online banking requires currently.

It wouldn't be too difficult to do, not for any group with the capital to put forward but the market isn't right and I don't feel it ever will be, therefore no, cryptocurrency will not be the future, it's hard sometimes to take a step back and look at things from the outside, as an outsider. The reasons for using a cryptocurrency in favour of anything else are not great, not to the market. If it was a product you simply could not sell it.

I'm on of those that treated bitcoin as a novelty, without sharing details, I exchanged a coin for something of little value, at the time of course there was no way of knowing. The pizza story has nothing on me. Watching things transpire it drove me to learn as much as I could about cryptocurrency and possibly find a way to gain a profit in using it, whilst this was possible it felt like I was just playing a game, surrounded by enthusiasts that enjoyed feeling like they were doing something more mature than trading cards, to be frank.

Just because the value increases overall, this is not always an indicator for future adoption.


----------



## Papahyooie (Aug 29, 2018)

yotano211 said:


> The stock market can also be gambling but not all stocks are like that. Most stocks are backed up by companies with history of growth or decline and over 100 years of research.
> Most crypto coins turned out to be in the order of some kind of fraud. Overall I think crypto is pure crap but the technology behind crypto is going to be the real magic.



A "good bet" is still a gamble. 

That's the point I'm trying to make. Even if a stock is backed by a company with a history of growth, is considered safe, etc etc... still gambling. You absolutely CAN still lose it. And the mentality that somehow you are 100% safe with ANY stock is naive.

Investing in BTC is simply a more risky gamble for those who like to play it faster and looser than most.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 30, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Investing in BTC is simply a more risky gamble for those who like to play it faster and looser than most.



The other thing people don't get is legitmate, skilled investors often include a small percentage of high risk/high reward assests in the odd-duck case they pay off.  Crypto is one case in which this applies.


----------



## Crusti (Aug 30, 2018)

Cryptocurrencies are the future for sure and future is now already. As for your thoughts about investing in it or not I'll advice you to learn a lot about crypto before you'll start doing it. In order to earn some money on it you have to know about trading things. The courses are changing all the time and without a certainknowledge you will  sell everything when a course will fall down a little as you'll be afraid of losing your money. So you can start with a little amount in order to try and decide if you're ready for that.


----------



## Papahyooie (Aug 30, 2018)

Crusti said:


> Cryptocurrencies are the future for sure and future is now already. As for your thoughts about investing in it or not I'll advice you to learn a lot about crypto before you'll start doing it. In order to earn some money on it you have to know about trading things. The courses are changing all the time and without a certainknowledge you will  sell everything when a course will fall down a little as you'll be afraid of losing your money. So you can start with a little amount in order to try and decide if you're ready for that.



Indeed. Most people "investing" in crypto do the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do... When the price starts shooting to the moon, they buy. When it starts an uptrend, they buy. They "wait and see if this uptick is going to hold." Then when it does hold for a bit, they buy. And right when they buy, it plummets. (and then they get scared and they sell again...) They do exactly the opposite of what an investor should do. We call these people "suckers."

Buy when there's blood in the streets. Sell when you think you're being just a little less greedy than everyone else.


----------



## Crusti (Sep 5, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> Indeed. Most people "investing" in crypto do the exact opposite of what you're supposed to do... When the price starts shooting to the moon, they buy. When it starts an uptrend, they buy. They "wait and see if this uptick is going to hold." Then when it does hold for a bit, they buy. And right when they buy, it plummets. (and then they get scared and they sell again...) They do exactly the opposite of what an investor should do. We call these people "suckers."
> 
> Buy when there's blood in the streets. Sell when you think you're being just a little less greedy than everyone else.



Exactly! I can't even understand why such people start trying to trade without any knowledge. But on the same time they do a good job for those who have skills by selling the crypto when it falls


----------



## Papahyooie (Sep 6, 2018)

Crusti said:


> Exactly! I can't even understand why such people start trying to trade without any knowledge. But on the same time they do a good job for those who have skills by selling the crypto when it falls


I can understand why they start trading with no knowledge. They want to get in on the hype and make some money too... What I CAN'T understand is why they then come into forums and blame crypto and hate on crypto supporters for it when they fail.


----------



## damian246 (Sep 9, 2018)

The cryptos are not the future but they are also part of the future. Most coins are not worth it but a few are.
Take Ripple e.g and the IBM Stellar Blockchain which are changing the way banking is done.
Don't know it? https://hx8800.com/bitcoin/coins-ripple-ibm.html Anyway only a few coins have it to stay, that will be the ones
which you can buy and exchange stuff for. Bitcoin, XRP, ETH plus a few others are accepted, 
not widely as a big issue the coin crowd needs to solve is the fee.


----------



## Crusti (Sep 10, 2018)

Papahyooie said:


> I can understand why they start trading with no knowledge. They want to get in on the hype and make some money too... What I CAN'T understand is why they then come into forums and blame crypto and hate on crypto supporters for it when they fail.


Because they think that only crypto itself is responsible for its failure. It does it specially for these people to argue


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 11, 2018)

*Marshall Islands warned against adopting digital currency*
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45485685
Short expert
The Republic of the Marshall Islands has been warned against adopting a digital currency as a second form of legal tender.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) said the country, which consists of hundreds of islands in the Pacific Ocean, should "seriously reconsider".

Currently, only the US dollar counts as legal tender in the islands.

A law to adopt a digital currency named "Sovereign" alongside the dollar was passed in February.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 11, 2018)

Should have copied one more line:
"The first virtual coins are due to be issued to members of the public via an initial coin offering (ICO) later this year."

It will fail miserably like all of the other ICOs over the last couple years.


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 11, 2018)

get that paper soldja


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 11, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Should have copied one more line:


Would have been he he'd to death


----------



## Space Lynx (Sep 12, 2018)

MaxHill said:


> I'm sure that the cryptocurrency is our future. Cryptocurrencies are growing, there are more and more of them. More shops and services accept payment in the cryptocurrency. It is very convenient. I recommend that you invest now. Be careful when investing and carefully study the dynamics of the market, choose a currency that will be interesting to you. Good luck.



It's very easy? so is paypal bruh. lol. so is going to ATM and getting cash, its all very easy and government backed as well if someone tries to steal myself i have protections that actually work, unlike fake crypto insurance policy scams you can buy. lol


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 12, 2018)

MaxHill said:


> I'm sure that the cryptocurrency is our future. Cryptocurrencies are growing, there are more and more of them. More shops and services accept payment in the cryptocurrency. It is very convenient. I recommend that you invest now. Be careful when investing and carefully study the dynamics of the market, choose a currency that will be interesting to you. Good luck.



Good morning, 2012 called and wants its statements back.

Crypto has clearly imploded upon itself due to simple human greed and wasteful behaviour. The blockchain isn't useful unless tweaked severely and maintained meticulously and works best in smaller, controlled 'chains' to follow, and only for authenticity of data. Crypto has been a learning experience and perhaps we will see an iteration of it in the future that does work, but when it does, it will be state controlled and therefore way too similar to what we already have and all it will be is a more efficient way to move numbers from one account to another.


----------



## dorsetknob (Sep 12, 2018)

ripping post  Time


MaxHill said:


> I'm sure that the cryptocurrency is our future.Sure might be true in a Cashless Future  where your Job if you have one that pays only in Credits of some kind Cryptocurrencies are growing, there are more and more of them.There are more and more Failed Crypto offerings that fail or are Out-right Frauds  More shops and services accept payment in the cryptocurrency.   Like where i walk around my neighbourhood and two local Towns  Pop of over 1Mil  and i see no one advertising  as accepting Anything  in Crypto coin Transactions It is very convenient.  Laugh out loud "Its to Volatile for Business Transactions"   recommend that you invest now. Be careful when investing and carefully study the dynamics of the market, choose a currency that will be interesting to you. Good luck.


There Read the Red Admendments thank you


----------



## Arrius (Sep 12, 2018)

Cryptocurrencies will always be a bubble for me. I actually have some money to invest right now.
But I wouldn't dare to invest in any of them for many reasons. 
I don't know the cryptocurrency market very well but unless you are an expert, you can't seem to make any money these days. 
That being said, I like the idea of alternative currencies to the ones we have dominating the markets right now. The idea was a great one to begin with, it is just that the implementation was flawed.


----------



## neatfeatguy (Sep 12, 2018)

I dumped out what little BTC I had when it last peaked over $8k. I figure I'd just wash my hands of it all. Made about $500 after everything was all said and done.

Usually, my luck, when I do things like this and cash out, whatever I was part of takes off and I miss the boat while everyone else enjoys the ride. This time around perhaps I made the correct call?

I'm not sure if things will pick up again or if it will just peter out. I'm okay with making a little cash off the entire thing, but it was more of a pain in the ass then it was really worth, if you ask me. The whole process of mining, exchanging coins around, watching prices spike and drop constantly while trying to get the best return in my investment. I'm glad I've washed my hands with it all.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 13, 2018)

Nope, and I hope that this craziness will end soon. I'll still pay my beers with euros and I don't want that GPU prices go up like last time just because people are mining toy money with 'em.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 13, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> Good morning, 2012 called and wants its statements back.



Crypto is still massively up from 2012 though...  but that's really not much consolation, I know.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 13, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Crypto is still massively up from 2012 though...  but that's really not much consolation, I know.


Same thing could be said of AMD ($6 -> $32) and NVIDIA ($15 -> $268).


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 13, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Same thing could be said of AMD ($6 -> $32) and NVIDIA ($15 -> $268).



Not quite on the same level no.  Bitcoin was around 1 dollar in 2012.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 13, 2018)

Corporations can't even list for $1.  AMD got kicked off of NYSE because they were under $5 for so long.


----------



## hat (Sep 13, 2018)

If only I had a time machine that could go back to 2012...


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 13, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Corporations can't even list for $1.  AMD got kicked off of NYSE because they were under $5 for so long.



So buy them in a back alley like a crypto pro.  You'd still be rich, assuming you did not buy drugs with it. 



hat said:


> If only I had a time machine that could go back to 2012...



Knowing any market in advance is guaranteed money.


----------



## John Naylor (Sep 13, 2018)

Modern Day Ponzi scheme designed to benefit only those powerful enough to manipulate the market.


----------



## notb (Sep 14, 2018)

MaxHill said:


> I'm sure that the cryptocurrency is our future. Cryptocurrencies are growing, there are more and more of them. More shops and services accept payment in the cryptocurrency. It is very convenient. I recommend that you invest now. Be careful when investing and carefully study the dynamics of the market, choose a currency that will be interesting to you. Good luck.


Cryptocurrency is not even our present and it's not like they could improve in any way (other than becoming controlled by government, maybe). Blockchain might stay, but you won't notice as a consumer.


FordGT90Concept said:


> Currency has nothing to do with control or ruling.  It's simply a medium of exchange used to settle debts.  As long as the trading parties agree to use the same medium to settle the debt, it doesn't really matter what medium it is.


As a medium of exchange - you're more or less correct. But this is not the only function of money.
It's also a store of value ("savings") and that the Gov can affect pretty easily (and does all the time).


> What are the pros and cons of using a cryptocurrency compared to a currency like the United States Dollar in terms of settling debts?  I can effortlessly name two cons: doesn't work without internet access and doesn't work without power. Help me with the pros because I'm not really seeing any.


None. Cryptocurrencies have no added value as a means of payment.


dorsetknob said:


> The Republic of the Marshall Islands has been warned against adopting a digital currency as a second form of legal tender.


The currency they use now (USD) is literally the only stable thing in the country. It's possibly one of the worst economies in the world at the moment. They make nothing beside some fish. They're basically sponsored by USA (in exchange for a naval base).


----------



## RCoon (Sep 14, 2018)

Please stop with the... I don't even know what it was, but two whole pages of _not cryptocurrency_ that had to be deleted is no fun.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 13, 2018)

notb said:


> None. Cryptocurrencies have no added value as a means of payment.



O yes they do, i.e. offshore hosting takes bitcoin, ETH and some other tokens. There are retailers which take (only) BTC or payments independent of Paypal. (which is real pain in the neck, and terribly expensive) Blockchain has forced SWIFT (the banking Service to wire Money) into a newer standard. If you deal with banks form the eastern hemisphere many use Ripple or XRP to transfer money. 

So it might even have enriched your life and you didn't know about it.


----------



## notb (Oct 13, 2018)

damian246 said:


> O yes they do, i.e. offshore hosting takes bitcoin, ETH and some other tokens. There are retailers which take (only) BTC or payments independent of Paypal. (which is real pain in the neck, and terribly expensive) Blockchain has forced SWIFT (the banking Service to wire Money) into a newer standard. If you deal with banks form the eastern hemisphere many use Ripple or XRP to transfer money.
> 
> So it might even have enriched your life and you didn't know about it.


"Added value" would mean cryptos bring something new to the table, not that they are accepted by some entities.

Money itself was the first huge jump. It meant you didn't have to take your cow to the shop to exchange for flour.
Cheques meant you didn't have to carry a suitcase of banknotes for large transactions.
Cards made it possible to stop using cash completely.
And electronic payments mean everything above can disappear.

From a consumer point of view, what does a crypto add? Nothing. It's not easier to use than an electronic payment and clearly not faster.
You've mentioned interbank transactions. OK, blockchain makes some sense here as an alternative technology. But banks covered that earlier. So if blockchain is cheaper, they may convert. But it's hardly a revolution.


----------



## Norton (Oct 14, 2018)

Deleted the not crypto discussion.. stay on topic or move along


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 14, 2018)

notb said:


> From a consumer point of view, what does a crypto add?



Anonymity, chiefly.  I could see this being useful for controversial web hosting, which was already used as an example, for freedom of speech applications.  That I support.  Unfortunately it comes with other baggage.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Anonymity, chiefly.  I could see this being useful for controversial web hosting, which was already used as an example, for freedom of speech applications.  That I support.  Unfortunately it comes with other baggage.


Anyone with an IP can host a website.  As long as it doesn't do anything that violates the rules of the ISP (e.g. no child porn) you can host it yourself with relative impunity.

If you did in fact meant websites like child porn, then they should be on the run from the law because what they're doing is despicable.  If they overwhelmingly decide to fund themselves via a cryptocurrency, that cryptocurrency is fair game too; just like how the fed uses dollar serialization to track criminal activity.

Silk Road hid behind cryptocurrencies and Tor network.  Still was found and shut down.


----------



## Norton (Oct 15, 2018)

notb said:


> snip.


Off topic- points earned


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 15, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Anyone with an IP can host a website. As long as it doesn't do anything that violates the rules of the ISP (e.g. no child porn) you can host it yourself with relative impunity.



Legally speaking yes.  Socially speaking no.  There are very much so social consequences  (and security ones, by drawing a target on yourself, but irrelevant here other than if you self host content that is unpopular you will be DDOS'd) for hosting contraversial content by it's nature and anonymous third party hosting can be something I'd see in demand.

I didn't mean universally illegal content, and certainly not child porn.  It doesn't even help with that anyways as universally illegal content will always be subject to hosting takedowns.  And keep in mind there is more that is illegal than child porn.  Some things are even illegal in one place but not another, muddying it further.  The world isn't so simple.  Regardless my point was a perfectly legal website may be very expensive and even dangerous to run with a real name tied to it.  One of cryptos few uses I can legitimately see applies here.


----------



## E-Bear (Oct 15, 2018)

Cryptocurrencies will become the future but probably will be more known as CREDITS like in futuristics movies. These days it's mostly free to whoever want to gather coins but once it becomes the norm in mondial economy you can be sure bankers and governments will try everything to make it illegal to mine at home. They will probably tell that it's like printing money and could destabilise the world economy due to an overproduction. Like printing money at home.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Legally speaking yes.  Socially speaking no.  There are very much so social consequences  (and security ones, by drawing a target on yourself, but irrelevant here other than if you self host content that is unpopular you will be DDOS'd) for hosting contraversial content by it's nature and anonymous third party hosting can be something I'd see in demand.


CloudFlare offers an anti-DDoS service where the domain points to their servers, they check for DDoS, and if negative, sends the browser on its way to the actual host server.



E-Bear said:


> Cryptocurrencies will become the future but probably will be more known as CREDITS like in futuristics movies. These days it's mostly free to whoever want to gather coins but once it becomes the norm in mondial economy you can be sure bankers and governments will try everything to make it illegal to mine at home. They will probably tell that it's like printing money and could destabilise the world economy due to an overproduction. Like printing money at home.


It will never become the "norm" because it's so inefficient and not scalable.  It may be used to settle some debts (like between a bank and an ATM or between international banks) but the beginning and end of the transaction is still legal tender because that is what is demanded and accepted.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 15, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> CloudFlare offers an anti-DDoS service where the domain points to their servers, they check for DDoS, and if negative, sends the browser on its way to the actual host server.



Yes, but it isn’t perfect from an anonyminity standpoint.  You can understand why an individual would not want it literally hosted at home as such.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

Internet is not anonymous.  Every IP address is registered to a provider and provider records can be subpoenaed to identify the user account that was using the IP for a given time period.  If you really have something to hide you'd use proxies.  That has naught to do with cryptocurrencies though.  Cash is the best way to operate anonymous, financially.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 15, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It will never become the "norm" because it's so inefficient and not scalable.



It’s scalable as hell if one adjusts block times/sizes.  As for efficiency, well, I don’t think it’ll match central banking ever, but there is certainly no reason it can’t be made much more efficient than what we presently see in a closed node network.  That should actually be rather competitive.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Internet is not anonymous.



Someone hasn’t met the crypto webhosts that ask for a username/password, payment and nothing else...  that’s pretty anonymous.

Bottomline:  You asked for a unique use case.  This is one.



FordGT90Concept said:


> Cash is the best way to operate anonymous, financially.



Online?  Don’t make me laugh.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

Internet is not anonymous.  If a transaction is to be made without a trail, you travel to the location and exchange cash.  In order to pick up that trail requires a lot of on site forensics work.  Whatever happened has to be very serious to worth the investment of time and energy to chase it down.  Even then, the trail relies a lot on witness testimony.

TL;DR: the vast majority of shady transactions don't happen online and cryptocurrency isn't going to change that.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 15, 2018)

> Internet is not anonymous.



You just completely ignored my point to basically repost the same thing?



FordGT90Concept said:


> If a transaction is to be made without a trail, you travel to the location and exchange cash.  In order to pick up that trail requires a lot of on site forensics work.  Whatever happened has to be very serious to worth the investment of time and energy to chase it down.  Even then, the trail relies a lot on witness testimony.
> 
> TL;DR: the vast majority of shady transactions don't happen online and cryptocurrency isn't going to change that.



I have a use case.  No one who's worried about social repercussions of hosting a website is literally going to meet their host in person to exchange cash.  The very idea has so many flaws.  This whole idea ended the moment humanity invented the internet tabloid and the photographic camera.

Also, I am not talking "shady (assuming illegal) transactions."  Anonymous and illegal/shady are not mutually inclusive.  Cryptocurrency isn't even ideal for that.

tl;dr you are ignoring my points and simply restating yours.  As I don't find talking to literal reposts of the same tired ideas with no avenue for educated debate fun, I'm out.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

The entire internet domain name system isn't anonymous nor is the server maintainers.  Push comes to shove, that information leads back to a cryptocurrency account which can be further investigated for behaviors to find the individuals with access to it.  How do you think Silk Road was taken down?

It may be a little bit more difficult to track down the owner of a cryptocurrency wallet than a bank account but if there's enough reason to find out, it will be found out.  Moreover, who paid for the website may not even matter.  Law enforcement can go after the host itself and shut it down without having to go after the financier.

The internet is not anonymous.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Oct 15, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The entire internet domain name system isn't anonymous nor is the server maintainers.  Push comes to shove, that information leads back to a cryptocurrency account which can be further investigated for behaviors to find the individuals with access to it.  How do you think Silk Road was taken down?
> 
> It may be a little bit more difficult to track down the owner of a cryptocurrency wallet than a bank account but if there's enough reason to find out, it will be found out.  Moreover, who paid for the website may not even matter.  Law enforcement can go after the host itself and shut it down without having to go after the financier.
> 
> The internet is not anonymous.


Neither is most people's actual access to crypto, i know my coinbase account isn't.

This thread title needs changing though, from do you think crypto is the future to ,
Can Ford convince the world crypto is shit.
Perhaps it is, I don't think so personally.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 15, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> How do you think Silk Road was taken down?



Certainly not via DNS, or via the crypto trail.  I suggest you do some more reading.  An undisclosed TOR network vulnerability has been theorized to be the most likely.  Probably the one they refused to disclose in Operation Playpen, which resulted in letting many pedophiles go so they could keep their super-secret exploit.

At any rate, you still seem to be assuming I am talking about law enforcement being involved.  I am not.  I have repeatedly stated that crypto is not suitable for this.  You seem to insist on pushing that point despite it being completely irrelevant to my use case.



FordGT90Concept said:


> The internet is not anonymous.



Depending on the level required, yes it is.

Example.  Name my name.  Do it now.

Thought so.



FordGT90Concept said:


> The entire internet domain name system isn't anonymous nor is the server maintainers.



Ever heard of a private domain registration?  This tends to be even stronger when even your host does not know who you are and acts as a registration proxy for continued crypto payments.  Provided again, you are doing nothing illegal, which is the premise on which I am operating,.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Certainly not via DNS, or via the crypto trail.  I suggest you do some more reading.  An undisclosed TOR network vulnerability has been theorized to be the most likely.  Probably the one they refused to disclose in Operation Playpen, which resulted in letting many pedophiles go so they could keep their super-secret exploit.
> 
> At any rate, you still seem to be assuming I am talking about law enforcement being involved.  I am not.  I have repeatedly stated that crypto is not suitable for this.  You seem to insist on pushing that point despite it being completely irrelevant to my use case.


Government never reveals its methods.



R-T-B said:


> Depending on the level required, yes it is.
> 
> Example.  Name my name.  Do it now.
> 
> Thought so.


I'm not about to waste my time investigating you.



R-T-B said:


> Ever heard of a private domain registration?  This tends to be even stronger when even your host does not know who you are and acts as a registration proxy for continued crypto payments.  Provided again, you are doing nothing illegal, which is the premise on which I am operating,.


"Private" just means that an individual's information doesn't show up on domain name look ups.  ICANN requires that, upon request, the information is made available.


----------



## StrayKAT (Oct 15, 2018)

An interview I put in the Google+ thread just had me rethink the whole nature of crypto (or rather, blockchains specifically). Maybe it is the future. It sounds better than the monolithic setups we have now (Central Banking, Clouds, etc).

I just don't think we'll upend a system like that without blood. There's no such a thing as a quiet revolution. And no such thing as better ideas winning simply because they're better.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 15, 2018)

Cloud is similar to crypto in theory: record updates are pushed to the network, confirmed, and applied.  The difference is that clouds have established trust (usually via pre-shared keys authenticating themselves to the network) where crypto has to go through a lot of hoops to establish trust (proof of work/proof of stake/proof of elapsed time).

I really don't see anything inheriently wrong with the pre-shared key structure of establishing trust.  Yes, there's someone in charge that handles the keys but that someone has vested interest in the network thriving.  It's fundamentally no different in theory than proof of stake but without the exorbitant cost because it's managed by humans instead of software.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> "Private" just means that an individual's information doesn't show up on domain name look ups. ICANN requires that, upon request, the information is made available.



Again, how is this relevant to a none-court order?  Since we are NOT talking illegal activities.



FordGT90Concept said:


> I'm not about to waste my time investigating you


Part of the point.  You missed it.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> Again, how is this relevant to a none-court order?  Since we are NOT talking illegal activities.


If the website refuses to comply with the request, ICANN can revoke their status as a TLD seller.  Everyone is contractually obligated to be responsive to domain ownership requests.  I've can't recall any case where it has been a problem.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I've can't recall any case where it has been a problem.



Look ford, I don't know what part of "it happens everyday and is actively offered" is hard to understand re anonymous registrations.  Maybe they are fudging the system, but my guess is they are just submitting themselves as the registrant or something.

It's irrelevant and a complete tangent to the end point though...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 16, 2018)

Um, looked back, no link or name given of such a service.  ICANN forbids anonymous for the same reason properties always have to have a verifiable name on the deed.  Someone could theoretically buy a domain name from a registrar using cryptocurrencies but the registrar is still required to collect accurate contact information.  Failure to provide, and keep up to date, records can result in forfeiture of the domain name.  The registrar can put their own contact information in and hide the owner from the public record but they're still required to make the owner's contact information available upon request.  Registrars are contractually obligated to follow this process.  More info.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Um, looked back, no link or name given of such a service.



If you need one, consult bitcointalk.

It's still irrelevant to my point.  And if you really had to, nothing is stopping you from using a fictional name.

This is getting circular and pendantic, frankly.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 16, 2018)

R-T-B said:


> If you need one, consult bitcointalk.


What?



R-T-B said:


> It's still irrelevant to my point.  And if you really had to, nothing is stopping you from using a fictional name.


http://archive.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp-rules-24oct99.htm
TL;DR: if the ICANN can't contact you in regard to a dispute, the domain may be forfeited to ICANN to put on the market.

ICANN/registrar has no obligation to you if you falsify records.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> What?
> 
> 
> http://archive.icann.org/en/udrp/udrp-rules-24oct99.htm
> ...



Tl;dr: only the email has to be valid.

I know because my own domain name, glacialsoftware.net is in my registrars name, not mine.  And the info they have to provide upon request?  They maintain they would only provide my email without a court order for my name and address.

It is very easy to get an anonymous email.  I'm sure you know that.

I use no-ip, and if you do a whois, you'll find their legal department for complaints. I'm certain there are hosts willing to have no info on file at all at bitcointalk listings, but meh, must not exist because ICANN regulations.  They probably ARE fudging the rules there, but the bottom line is it happens and they get away with it en masse.

Seriously ford, you are driving this OT to establish something pretty much irrelevant to the discussion.  No one cares about the nitty gritty of the use case, or even it's ethics.  My point was soley that it exists and is used.  I'll link you some crypto ads in PM if you insist but will not continue to drive this further OT into ICANN policy of all things.


----------



## Norton (Oct 16, 2018)

Maybe you 2 should take this to PM since this is looking like a 2 way conversation anyway....


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 16, 2018)

Norton said:


> Maybe you 2 should take this to PM since this is looking like a 2 way conversation anyway....



Agree.



R-T-B said:


> I'll link you some crypto ads in PM if you insist but will not continue to drive this further OT into ICANN policy of all things.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 22, 2018)

I kinda liked the 2 way debate, it showed that we are pretty different in our believes and that believes stop where knowledge begins.
Most people believe on a state of rightness, a society where all laws are obeyed to the small print. They overlook or don't believe that printing more $ could have a political ulterior motive. Printing more $ create inflation and inflation is the enemy of the common men (people if you will). The creation of bitcoin sprang from that very reason and the bitcoin crowd still believes that one blockchain currency will substitute all other currencies.

The believes of the blockchain crowd are as mislead as the believes of the state of law and order.
21 million bitcoin or one bitcoin for every 5 people?  (if world population freezes that is) And you cannot freeze development.

Interesting article of all the monies in the world > https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...s-in-the-entire-world-in-one-chart-2015-12-18

You can buy domains with endings no one knows they even exist, there is more to domain endings as only .com.


----------



## qubit (Oct 22, 2018)

Just to answer the original question in post 1, no I doubt it, or after a decade they would have been more prominent.
Instead they are characterised by massive instability in value and abuse by criminals. Shame really, because I agree with the principle of cryptocurrencies.


----------



## ppn (Oct 22, 2018)

And there are so many of them, new one every minute.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 22, 2018)

ppn said:


> And there are so many of them, new one every minute.



Yes unfortunately for the blockchain movement there are more and more. Showing us how far away most creators of coins are from Satoshi. 
Greed is the name of the game, you see a new start up and the people doing the grunt work getting next to nothing while the "leadership" is not sharing their income ratio. 
IMHO about 30 to 50% of the newly created coins will die rather sooner than later.


----------



## Aubin (Oct 25, 2018)

Hello all. I'm writing this because from your answers depends my future (kind of). So that's the thing, I came from USA with loads of money, I mean more then I get here. So, I'm really new at this all these mining things, and I was wondering is it still profitable to invest into cryptocurriencies? Because I've heard rumors that bitcoin is going to jump above 100k in few years, but skeptics says that it is impossible. What should I do?


----------



## OutThereSomewhere (Oct 25, 2018)

Aubin said:


> Hello all. I'm writing this because from your answers depends my future (kind of). So that's the thing, I came from USA with loads of money, I mean more then I get here. So, I'm really new at this all these mining things, and I was wondering is it still profitable to invest into cryptocurriencies? *Because I've heard rumors that bitcoin is going to jump above 100k in few years,* *but skeptics says that it is impossible. *What should I do?



I think you've answered your own question.


----------



## neatfeatguy (Oct 25, 2018)

Aubin said:


> Hello all. I'm writing this because from your answers depends my future (kind of). So that's the thing, I came from USA with loads of money, I mean more then I get here. So, I'm really new at this all these mining things, and I was wondering is it still profitable to invest into cryptocurriencies? Because I've heard rumors that bitcoin is going to jump above 100k in few years, but skeptics says that it is impossible. What should I do?



The way I see it, investing in a cryptocurrency is just a long term gambling venture.
Might it go up? Sure.
Might it go down? Sure.
No one knows for sure how it will all go.

Is it worthwhile to invest money into it? That's where you have to decide if gambling is your thing and if it is, how much you want to gamble.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 25, 2018)

Aubin said:


> What should I do?


Crytocurrencies are not an investment. They are a hobby that happen to have a few interesting uses. Invest your money somewhere far more stable.


----------



## trog100 (Oct 25, 2018)

bitcoin is now very stable at around $6500 it has been for few weeks.. things have changed somewhat..

and in todays world there is nowhere that is guaranteed stable lex.. except maybe gold bullion.. which isnt likely to go down much but it could well go up a lot if the markets crash as i think they are in the process of doing doing right at this moment..

trog


----------



## Salty_sandwich (Oct 25, 2018)

No i don't think cryptocurrencies are the future, I used to mine them back in 2012
However I do believe the Blockchain tech is a grate idea for other uses, other than a currency

who holds the biggest % of all the bitcoin hashing power these days ?

To much manipulation when trading, for one / pumping and dumping

when your told dont put more in to it than you can afford to lose, really means your just going to be sharked ... and there are lots of sharks in the crypto scene.

Just a warning to those of you who dont really understand crypto but thinking of investing, my advise, don't, bitcoin has lost it's way when you go back to it's roots and the idea of it.

most people will get fleeced sooner or later.


----------



## hat (Oct 25, 2018)

Aubin said:


> Hello all. I'm writing this because from your answers depends my future (kind of). So that's the thing, I came from USA with loads of money, I mean more then I get here. So, I'm really new at this all these mining things, and I was wondering is it still profitable to invest into cryptocurriencies? Because I've heard rumors that bitcoin is going to jump above 100k in few years, but skeptics says that it is impossible. What should I do?


You would need a crystal ball to truly answer that question... It could go up, could go down, nobody knows for sure. As for me, I paid a whopping $900 over a year ago for two graphics cards to mine with. So far it's paid for itself, but the profitability right now is much less than I'd hoped for... but I'm still piling up BTC for a rainy day, or if the value grows a lot again...


----------



## damian246 (Oct 26, 2018)

Aubin said:


> ..... I was wondering is it still profitable to invest into cryptocurriencies? Because I've heard rumors that bitcoin is going to jump above 100k in few years, but skeptics says that it is impossible. What should I do?



Sure is, just be aware that it goes up and down. The higher the uncertainty, the bigger the stakes the higher the risk.  There is a race going on, which coin will still be here in 2020. A looming economical down turn is certainly helping Bitcoin and many altcoins. Don't forget one thing, there is a lot of hype in the blockchain movement. New ICOs almost every day. Many just made to get your money. But still, a few have a chance. Will Bitcoin in the end replace FIAT? I don't think so, there are too many people thinking that the "whole coin thing" is a fraud. BTC or Btcoin are going into its 11th year, that is quite old. 

You should not invest in something you have no idea about.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 26, 2018)

Hype? What hype? The hype peaked in 2017.  Where's this influx of cash going to come from?  Marketcap of crypto is about $1 billion if memory serves.  To reach $100,000 per coin, the market would have to expand by 1,538% reaching $15.3 billion market cap.  Seems extremely unlikely.  Not impossible, but I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 26, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Hype? What hype? The hype peaked in 2017.  Where's this influx of cash going to come from?  Marketcap of crypto is about $1 billion if memory serves.  To reach $100,000 per coin, the market would have to expand by 1,538% reach $15.3 billion market cap.  From who?  Seems extremely unlikely.  Not impossible, but I wouldn't bet on it.



Go to twitter and listen to the blockchain crowd. Tron, Hodl are hyped. i.e. there are more.
Way too many Coins for my taste.
You don't need to concentrate on BTC, ETH could well go from 200+ to 2000+ and your market cap is inflated.
Actual market cap is at 125 Billion I think. > https://www.blockchain.com/charts/market-cap


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 26, 2018)

damian246 said:


> Go to twitter and listen to the blockchain crowd. Tron, Hodl are hyped. i.e. there are more.


Of course they are because they have the most to gain from it.  I'm picturing Jim Cramer right now.



damian246 said:


> Actual market cap is at 125 Billion I think. > https://www.blockchain.com/charts/market-cap


In which case it would have to grow to almost $2 trillion to reach $100,000.  Fat chance, at least not in the next five years.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 27, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Of course they are because they have the most to gain from it.  I'm picturing Jim Cramer right now.
> In which case it would have to grow to almost $2 trillion to reach $100,000.  Fat chance, at least not in the next five years.



Yeap for that very reason its called hyping  

I doubt BTC will get there in 5 years. 
Could well be that it won't be there in 5 years as there are more advanced alternatives i.e ETH or even ETHC


----------



## dorsetknob (Oct 27, 2018)

damian246 said:


> Go to twitter and listen to the blockchain crowd. Tron, Hodl are hyped. i.e. there are more.
> Way to many Coins for my taste.



Twitter the latest boiler room selling forum  "Buyer BEWARE"


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 27, 2018)

damian246 said:


> Sure is, just be aware that it goes up and down. The higher the uncertainty, the bigger the stakes the higher the risk.  There is a race going on, which coin will still be here in 2020. A looming economical down turn is certainly helping Bitcoin and many altcoins. Don't forget one thing, there is a lot of hype in the blockchain movement. New ICOs almost every day. Many just made to get your money. But still, a few have a chance. Will Bitcoin in the end replace FIAT? I don't think so, there are too many people thinking that the "whole coin thing" is a fraud. BTC or Btcoin are going into its 11th year, that is quite old.
> 
> You should not invest in something you have no idea about.



You don't seem to understand that what you are saying is contradictio in terminis from beginning to end.

As long as there are all these scams coins, huge fluctuation in value, and mass manipulation, and no enforcement on those, crypto will never be reliable. And with its lack of reliability, comes massive devaluation, making it a very silly investment. It will always remain short term gain, in other words, a bunch of vultures pecking at corpses. It has no future in this state as a currency, and without purpose, there is no value.

That doesn't mean you can't make money off it, of course. But its not a very healthy environment altogether.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 28, 2018)

Vayra86 said:


> That doesn't mean you can't make money off it, of course. But its not a very healthy environment altogether.



Exactly and that is the reason for the contradiction. You write a contradiction and some people will get it. 
You can make money with cryptocurrency, but you need to be aware of the risk. IMHO Trades with crypto are more secure than forex trades. 
Internet without scam would not be the same. It is not so difficult to spot scam, no social networks i.e. Always rushing to get to the money etc.


----------



## Salty_sandwich (Oct 28, 2018)

Bitcoin was not invented to be an investment, it was put out to give people their own non state controlled way to trade, but as with anything when it becomes of cash value, it's being abused, example, large short term profit gains, it was never meant to be used for this, and just proves it wont work, it will be abused as long as money can be made from it and has to be state regulated, which is what it was meant to avoid.


----------



## damian246 (Oct 28, 2018)

Salty_sandwich said:


> Bitcoin was not invented to be an investment, it was put out to give people their own non state controlled way to trade,



Yes and kinda meant to replace the world's currencies which is quite crazy. Crazy because why would someone replace world currencies which need to grow in size or mass with a currency which is meant to be restricted to 21 million pieces? And that is what supports speculation even more.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 28, 2018)

damian246 said:


> 21 million pieces



It supports far more decimal precision than that and there is no reason one could not one so called satoshi as a unit.  There are 100 million satoshis in a single bitcoin.  I'll let you do the math and see how it can easily support a two decimal system like the USD.

Not that I believe it will, I am simply stating it is mathmatically doable.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Oct 28, 2018)

Most fiat currencies grow volume with demand stabilizing per-unit value.  Cryptocurrencies have no such stabilizing mechanism.


How many satoshis does an apple cost?  Imagine printing that on product labels, then having BTC jump up $1000 USD overnight, and suddenly all of your labels are bad for business.


----------



## R-T-B (Oct 29, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Most fiat currencies grow volume with demand stabilizing per-unit value. Cryptocurrencies have no such stabilizing mechanism.



I was only commenting on the math of the idea that you couldn't do enough currency with it, which is wrong.  You certainly could.  I said nothing about it being well designed (it isn't).  But you do seem content to keep going there, eh?


----------



## John Naylor (Oct 29, 2018)

Today's Ponzi scheme .... enough people will be allowed to make money to make the scheme sell, but fir the most part, the only real winnfers will be those manipulating the market


----------



## damian246 (Nov 29, 2018)

John Naylor said:


> Today's Ponzi scheme .... enough people will be allowed to make money to make the scheme sell, but fir the most part, the only real winnfers will be those manipulating the market



Bitcoin is no poncy scheme, neither are about 25 % of the Altcoins which are connected to bitcoin because they are so aloft they believe it to be unnecessary even creating a *pay with xxxcoin* button. Bitcoin without FIAT could almost survive, Most others cannot. The bitcoin slaughter of Nov. 2018  will cleanse and lowered the price for some people with an excess of money. 

For the many people critical to the Blockchain you should use telegram. in telegram you have access to many start up Coiner Groups which teaches you a lot about the human factor in the Crypto Environment. I'm pretty sure if there are marketing guy here that they could tell a story or 2 about start ups without any money to make it.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Nov 29, 2018)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Most fiat currencies grow volume with demand stabilizing per-unit value.  Cryptocurrencies have no such stabilizing mechanism.
> How many satoshis does an apple cost?  Imagine printing that on product labels, then having BTC jump up $1000 USD overnight, and suddenly all of your labels are bad for business.



This is inherently flawed logic. How much does an apple cost in Gold? Oil? Gas? Silver? Salmon? King Crab? Everything has a perceived value. Value is based on market perception + Mining/Development/Creation Costs.

"Fiat currencies grow volume with demand stabilizing per-unit value." Except they don't. Is 1 USD worth 1 Euro? Why is 1 Euro worth more than a dollar then? Why is 1USD worth 20 Pesos? 

Fiat only works like you say on a micro level, at the country of origin. Bitcoin works on a global/macro level. There is no exchange rate for Bitcoin. 1 BTC in USA is = 1 BTC in Mexico.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

Funny thing about gold...  on an average 1 pair of shoes/sandles costs roughly the same in gold today as it did thousands of years ago in the Roman times.

Same goes with Bitcoin as it is not inflationary either.


----------



## trog100 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> Funny thing about gold...  on an average 1 pair of shoes/sandles costs roughly the same in gold today as it did thousands of years ago in the Roman times.
> 
> Same goes with Bitcoin as it is not inflationary either.



would that be cheap chinese sandals or proper roman sandals.. he he

trog


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> Funny thing about gold...  on an average 1 pair of shoes/sandles costs roughly the same in gold today as it did thousands of years ago in the Roman times.
> 
> Same goes with Bitcoin as it is not inflationary either.


We'd see about that if there was such a credit crunch. What security is there against a virus attack, costing the total wallet count?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 29, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> This is inherently flawed logic. How much does an apple cost in Gold? Oil? Gas? Silver? Salmon? King Crab? Everything has a perceived value. Value is based on market perception + Mining/Development/Creation Costs.
> 
> "Fiat currencies grow volume with demand stabilizing per-unit value." Except they don't. Is 1 USD worth 1 Euro? Why is 1 Euro worth more than a dollar then? Why is 1USD worth 20 Pesos?
> 
> Fiat only works like you say on a micro level, at the country of origin. Bitcoin works on a global/macro level. There is no exchange rate for Bitcoin. 1 BTC in USA is = 1 BTC in Mexico.


Markets are always relative.  An advantage of fiat is that money supply can be eased and constricted relative to the economy.  An apple's cost in USD is relative to the cost of virtually everything else USD is used for.  There's no market cap on fiat currencies because it's subject to change.

1 USD is not worth 1 EUR because they are not pegged to each other and each fiat currency moves relative to its economy that powers it.  EUR has more purchasing power than USD because the EU has lower supply of EURs thereby each EUR having more value than each USD.

Exchange rates aren't fixed even when pegged (because pegged currencies are allowed to float).


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

trog100 said:


> would that be cheap chinese sandals or proper roman sandals.. he he
> 
> trog



I'd say genuine Italian leather 



mtcn77 said:


> We'd see about that if there was such a credit crunch. What security is there against a virus attack, costing the total wallet count?



If the wallet is lost/destroyed/erased there is 24 word passphrase wallet reconstruction, on top of regular wallet password.

Stolen is stolen,  like anything.


----------



## moproblems99 (Nov 29, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Why is 1USD worth 20 Pesos?



Please tell me the dollar is worth more than 20 pesos.


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> I'd say genuine Italian leather


Currently reading up on leather tanning and finding it ironic how google won't help me with a lead on 'ecoltan'(some miracle tanning agent us Turks found?).


yakk said:


> If the wallet is lost/destroyed/erased there is 24 word passphrase wallet reconstruction, on top of regular wallet password.
> 
> Stolen is stolen,  like anything.


Count as in _everyone's_, in an instant, but thanks for the heads up!


----------



## Gorstak (Nov 29, 2018)

I think blockchain has a definite future, but I wouldn't bet my money on cryptocurrencies. I only invested about 10$ into this whole coin bussiness, about 5 or 6 years ago @ cex.io website. They held 50% of all hashing power in the world and found a block every 8 seconds. I haven't logged in there since I've invested. I think I sold or lost the cellnumber that I used to authenticate myself there. Don't really care, but still receive emails from them occasionally.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Nov 29, 2018)

moproblems99 said:


> Please tell me the dollar is worth more than 20 pesos.


Ok it is actually worth 20.23 pesos. lol.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

mtcn77 said:


> Currently reading up on leather tanning and finding it ironic how google won't help me with a lead on 'ecoltan'(some miracle tanning agent us Turks found?).
> Count as in _everyone's_, in an instant, but thanks for the heads up!



That would theoretically require every copy of the public ledger be erased worldwide.

Every ledger in cold storage has the possibility to restore every wallet ever made following the passphrase update and before its timestamp.


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> That would theoretically require every copy of the public ledger be erased worldwide.
> 
> Every ledger in cold storage has the possibility to restore every wallet ever made following the passphrase update and before its timestamp.


_That's_ where it targets? I know its fiction, but _stuxnet? _This heist is worth 10% US debt at one time, mind you, so there is incentive for it.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

mtcn77 said:


> _That's_ where it targets? I know its fiction, but _stuxnet? _This heist is worth 10% US debt at one time, mind you, so there is incentive for it.



1 public ledger can rebuild the entire bitcoin network.  The more individual non-mining & non-pruned nodes there are, the more the copies of the ledger exist worldwide (and offworld since the ledger is also now broadcast from satellite) and the more robust the network. 

That's the backbone of a decentralized blockchain vs. a much, much, much, more efficient centralized database, but which is also much more prone to hacking, failure, and centralized control.


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> 1 public ledger can rebuild the entire bitcoin network.  The more individual non-mining & non-pruned nodes there are, the more the copies of the ledger exist worldwide (and offworld since the ledger is also now broadcast from satellite) and the more robust the network.
> 
> That's the backbone of a decentralized blockchain vs. a much, much, much, more efficient centralized database, but which is also much more prone to hacking, failure, and centralized control.


Okay, but isn't running a non-mining node expensive?


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

mtcn77 said:


> Okay, but isn't running a non-mining node expensive?



A non-mining full node can run on a Raspberry Pi and a 1TB hard drive (500gb + years of extra space).

Edit: 500gb, not 500mb


----------



## moproblems99 (Nov 29, 2018)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> Ok it is actually worth 20.23 pesos. lol.



I only asked because I remember when the dollar used to be worth a lot of pesos.  So, it means the dollar sucks now.  Didn't mean anything about the accuracy of your post.


----------



## mtcn77 (Nov 29, 2018)

yakk said:


> A non-mining full node can run on a Raspberry Pi and a 1TB hard drive (500gb + years of extra space).
> 
> Edit: 500gb, not 500mb


Is that with or without the computational validity predication? Say, I topple the wallet count of >99% of the computational powerload. Would the rest of the 1% take enough time to reload the rest of the blockchain until I double spend? I have no incentive to do this, but debt deflation might be enticing to some...


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Nov 29, 2018)

mtcn77 said:


> Is that with or without the computational validity predication? Say, I topple the wallet count of >99% of the computational powerload. Would the rest of the 1% take enough time to reload the rest of the blockchain until I double spend? I have no incentive to do this, but debt deflation might be enticing to some...



Nope, unless there's consensus across the nodes, the transaction will be refused.  Plus the # of confirmations required could increase dramatically from 6 to 12 or 24 or whatever.  Many scam altcoins try to bypass this to increase speed, but they all failed.


----------



## damian246 (Dec 6, 2018)

yakk said:


> Nope, unless there's consensus across the nodes, the transaction will be refused.  Plus the # of confirmations required could increase dramatically from 6 to 12 or 24 or whatever.  Many scam altcoins try to bypass this to increase speed, but they all failed.


ETH is not really a scam is it?


----------



## R-T-B (Dec 7, 2018)

damian246 said:


> ETH is not really a scam is it?



No, not really.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 7, 2018)

damian246 said:


> ETH is not really a scam is it?



Depends who you ask 

There were enough irregularities with ETH...  also running an ETH full node is next to impossible without crashing, even running it strictly in SSD (can't sync the complete chain with a spinning HD anymore)...  not sure how that coin is even still operating with little to no independent full nodes tbh...  if one day it somehow does go POS, then I'll change my view from unintentional scam to complete scam.


----------



## damian246 (Dec 7, 2018)

yakk said:


> not sure how that coin is even still operating with little to no independent full nodes tbh...  if one day it somehow does go POS, then I'll change my view from unintentional scam to complete scam.



Surely you are aware of the hard fork ETh went thru in 2016. 
https://futurism.com/the-dao-heist-undone-97-of-eth-holders-vote-for-the-hard-fork/ 

Couldn't it be just a misalignment, a some port which has changed or so? 
What I heard from ETH and ETHC is not what I like but it is hardly a scam. Lots of too large egos there. 

People tend to call their own decisions scam, like buying ETH at 500 and seeing it decline.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Dec 7, 2018)

damian246 said:


> Surely you are aware of the hard fork ETh went thru in 2016.
> https://futurism.com/the-dao-heist-undone-97-of-eth-holders-vote-for-the-hard-fork/
> 
> Couldn't it be just a misalignment, a some port which has changed or so?
> ...



The fact there is a leadership team is one of my issues as it implies a degree of centralization which can influence and defeat more decentralized consensus.  Don't get me wrong, ETH can be useful like STORJ can actually be useful for secure cloud backups, but STORJ is completely centralized, so to be a store of value wouldn't be something they are designed for.  If ETH goes the way of POS, who is it that really wants that?  Who would really benefit the most from POS instead of POW?

Price does not factor in to my view of a coin's properties.  It's unlikely any coin would crash back down to zero, if anything these coins become open season for P&D (pump & dump) scam groups once they become cheap enough, and there are still (barely) enough miners to enable transactions.


----------



## damian246 (Dec 16, 2018)

yakk said:


> .  If ETH goes the way of POS, who is it that really wants that?  Who would really benefit the most from POS instead of POW?



I liked ETH better before the fork, specially when leaving parts of the crew behind, its only a matter of time till the next fork comes along leaving another part of the new crew behind. Leadership implies ego and big ego is harmful in a project which fights super egos (The State) 

I think so too that once cheap enough the lifeless Coins will be bought up for say "other" purposes, most likely fraud. Even though that most of the smaller coins did fraud already their investors. I was offered to marketing once on a Hyipp ICO and their financing was around 75 % below the minimum needed.


----------



## jovica.raicki (Apr 16, 2019)

Some advice about Bitcoin Cash? What do you think about it, I intend to buy some BCH.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 16, 2019)

jovica.raicki said:


> Some advice about Bitcoin Cash?


NEVER INVEST MORE THAN YOUR PREPARED TO LOSE



jovica.raicki said:


> I intend to buy some BCH.


ACCEPT THAT YOU MIGHT NEVER SEE A PROFITABLE RETURN


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Apr 16, 2019)

jovica.raicki said:


> Some advice about Bitcoin Cash? What do you think about it, I intend to buy some BCH.



Take a look at a bch graph...

Make sure to sell it after one of their infamous artificial pumps.  It tends to crash hard after.  Bch is just a typical pump & dump altcoin so you'll probably end up a on the losing end.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Apr 16, 2019)

I would avoid BCH, there are many other coins/tokens that are far more trust worthy. BCH CEO is a..well not a great guy.


----------



## jovica.raicki (Apr 24, 2019)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> I would avoid BCH, there are many other coins/tokens that are far more trust worthy. BCH CEO is a..well not a great guy.


OK, then I'll invest in BTC and ETH, I bought some bitcoins before, 0.00500669, I spent 50 euros when BTC was approximately 10000 USD, now I'm waiting for the bitcoin price to fall below 3500 USD, and Ethereum below 150 USD.


----------



## notb (Apr 24, 2019)

jovica.raicki said:


> OK, then I'll invest in BTC and ETH, I bought some bitcoins before, 0.00500669, I spent 50 euros when BTC was approximately 10000 USD, now I'm waiting for the bitcoin price to fall below 3500 USD, and Ethereum below 150 USD.


You're looking forward to losing more money? WTF?
Don't you have lotteries in Serbia?


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Apr 24, 2019)

jovica.raicki said:


> Some advice about Bitcoin Cash? What do you think about it, I intend to buy some BCH.


Take that $50 out of your wallet, grab yourself a lighter, proceed to light the $50 bill and watch it burn, welcome to crypto. 

Seriously it's dead, there's no money to be made and the only ones who made money out of it were the creators and early investers


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 24, 2019)

notb said:


> You're looking forward to losing more money? WTF?
> Don't you have lotteries in Serbia?





NdMk2o1o said:


> Seriously it's dead, there's no money to be made and the only ones who made money out of it were the creators and early investors


I'm no fan of crypto$, but you two are being completely inaccurate. Whether deliberately or not might be open for debate, but there is money to be had. Mining isn't as profitable as it was in late 2017 and 2018 sure, but to say it's worthless is delusional.
https://coinranking.com/
Goto the settings and select 30day change and you'll quickly see what I'm talking about.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Apr 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm no fan of crypto$, but you two are being completely inaccurate. Whether deliberately or not might be open for debate, but there is money to be had. Mining isn't as profitable as it was in late 2017 and 2018 sure, but to say it's worthless is delusional.
> https://coinranking.com/
> Goto the settings and select 30day change and you'll quickly see what I'm talking about.


I wasn't being literal, I'll be sure to mark future posts with /sarcasm, but in a sense it's true, crypto is a lost cause and there are many better ways of investing, the thing is with crypto people think it's a get rich quick scheme and unfortunately there is no such thing. My 2nd comment which wasn't so tongue in cheek remaisn true, only a minority got rich out of crypto, the majority got suckered


----------



## notb (Apr 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm no fan of crypto$, but you two are being completely inaccurate. Whether deliberately or not might be open for debate, but there is money to be had. Mining isn't as profitable as it was in late 2017 and 2018 sure, but to say it's worthless is delusional.
> https://coinranking.com/
> Goto the settings and select 30day change and you'll quickly see what I'm talking about.


Man, it's a random walk.

The fact that a value changes over time and you can bet on the direction doesn't mean you'll earn money.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 24, 2019)

notb said:


> The fact that a value changes over time and you can bet on the direction doesn't mean you'll earn money.


That can be said about anything in life.


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 24, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> I wasn't being literal, I'll be sure to mark future posts with /sarcasm, but in a sense it's true, crypto is a lost cause and there are many better ways of investing, the thing is with crypto people think it's a get rich quick scheme and unfortunately there is no such thing. My 2nd comment which wasn't so tongue in cheek remaisn true, only a minority got rich out of crypto, the majority got suckered




there is still a chance bitcoin will skyrocket again when world economies go through another major recession. I am hoping BTC will hit 3k or below per coin, then I might consider buying one coin and just sitting on it for a few years. At this point I don't see it ever being a currency, but I do see it as a form of gold.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 24, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> but I do see it as a form of gold.


Crypto-gold? LOL!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 25, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> there is still a chance bitcoin will skyrocket again when world economies go through another major recession.


“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, shame on both of us.” --Stephen King


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 25, 2019)

FordGT90Concept said:


> “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me three times, shame on both of us.” --Stephen King



Pipe down.  I'm still banking on some of that.


----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Crypto-gold? LOL!



ye, cause it will never be mainstream, the average human doesn't concern themselves with things like alternate currencies.  doesn't mean there isn't value to be exploited here though during next major recession


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 25, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> ye, cause it will never be mainstream, the average human doesn't concern themselves with things like alternate currencies.  doesn't mean there isn't value to be exploited here though during next major recession



Gold is mainstream though, and people _historically _trust in its value. Its also an actual rare earth metal that exists in limited quantity and has very specific qualities, some of which we need for key processes and items.

Bitcoin has none of those aspects. I fail to see your analogy. Crypto currency only exists by the grace of a number of people believing its worth anything, and it is not linked to any real world capital. If it went under or vanished tomorrow, no single person on this planet would bat an eye apart from the losers that still invest in it. Compare that to the total absence of gold in one day: even now, when its no longer an actual currency, that would be a major issue.

I say this often, but really, you have to consider the economics of it all for things to make sense. Crypto-currency's economy is completely flawed. It creates a completely random reallocation of wealth through its mining principle (no economic basis apart from 'who early adopted and when', to me this reads like a 'pre-order' and nothing else), its by design a speculative item and that will never change because of mining (after all, everyone expects his coin to increase in value all the time) and because of that it would completely cripple a world economy if it were truly linked to it. After all, if the only trend is up, why would anyone ever sell? And if no one sells, what do you get? Everything stagnates. It means extremely high interest rates on loans, for example. It also might mean that while you're waiting for your pizza to be delivered, it gets noticeably more expensive by the time you get to eat it.

The only real thing crypto ever had going for it was the decentralized, distributed nature of it and how that would allow us to speed up transactions and handle them correctly and fairly. But crypto was and is not needed to get there at all. Our current systems and banks are perfectly capable of that - and even already doing it.


----------



## ZenZimZaliben (Apr 25, 2019)

If you don't trust the government, the fed, or the banks then crypto is a great solution.


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 25, 2019)

Understand that it is a setup as a windfall for market manipulators  who pump up the value just enough to entice the uninformed to move in ... once the "pump" gets the price hiugh enough, they will "dump" leaving all the noobies witha fat loss.


----------



## Divide Overflow (Apr 25, 2019)

ZenZimZaliben said:


> If you don't trust the government, the fed, or the banks then crypto is a great solution.


Even less is known about the whales of crypto or the numerous shady exchanges.  If you don't trust the government, the fed or the banks, crypto isn't the cure-all for tinfoil hat wearers, although some treat it as such.


----------



## moproblems99 (Apr 25, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> Understand that it is a setup as a windfall for market manipulators  who pump up the value just enough to entice the uninformed to move in ... once the "pump" gets the price hiugh enough, they will "dump" leaving all the noobies witha fat loss.



Investing 101


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 25, 2019)

Divide Overflow said:


> numerous shady exchanges



Honestly, in this day and age why go to a shady exchange at all?  Coinbase and the like are as reputable as Paypal.

The "shady garage operated exchange" crap is largely illegal since Mt Gox, and pretty uncompetitive with the above anyways.  That eras long gone.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 26, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Mt Gox


? Thinking I might have missed something...


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 26, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> ? Thinking I might have missed something...



Google it.

EDIT:

Sorry, that was unhelpful.  I am experiencing family drama right now and in a bad mood.

Start here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mt._Gox

In short, backyard exchange that exploded in size, couldn't cope, lost tons of bitcoin, shutdown, and spurred tons of "never again" legislation internationally.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 26, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Google it.
> EDIT:
> Sorry, that was unhelpful.  I am experiencing family drama right now and in a bad mood.
> Start here:
> ...


Ah. For a sec I thought it was a typo. Like Mr. Gox. Thnx for the link.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 26, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Ah. For a sec I thought it was a typo. Like Mr. Gox. Thnx for the link.



Fun fact:  It's actually short for "Magic The Gathering Online eXchange."  Before bitcoin, they dealt in used trading cards.

Totally legit operation, obviously.

To this day the bankruptcy proceedings for them are the de facto only letter I have ever gotten from Japan, and were all in incomprehensible Japanese.  My mom at first thought INTERPOL was after me since it was indecpherable and froma a circuit court in Tokyo.  Good times.


----------



## Liquid Cool (Oct 7, 2019)

To get on topic.....

Do you think Cryptocurrencies are the future?

No, I believe they are nothing more than a symptom of the present.

Again...Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. A must read.

BTC looks just about ready... 

 Best Regards,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 7, 2019)

Liquid Cool said:


> To get on topic.....
> 
> Do you think Cryptocurrencies are the future?
> 
> ...



even if BTC does become a thing it will be heavily regulated, so if walmart wants to pay its employees in bitcoin, IRS still going to tax x percentage, etc.  at this point its just a lottery on its value, and the moment it becomes heavily regulated it no longer will have possibility of major value increase. i think 11k is BTC peak now, most people refuse to buy into something if it sounds like oh you can drop 5 grand and still only orn .41 worth of a single coin... most people just don't think that way, even though to us it doesn't matter.  BTC had its two major rises largely in part to hype, media, and a cheap buy in with rapidly increasing high payoff... then boom crash...  10k might be its steady point though. i think its the max as well though. 

also, quantum computing is moving faster than anyone ever thought, will be interesting to see if it really can hack/mess up cryptocurrencies in 10 years time, etc. one of the benefits of fiat is it its embedded in a massive monstrosity called the bureaucracy... quantum snuggled with einstein and still decided not to mess with that chick at the bar...


----------



## Liquid Cool (Oct 7, 2019)

Lynx...I started in the financial world at six years old...that is five decades ago.  I've since been forced to retire due to my health.

That doesn't keep me from a lifelong interest in market bubbles.  I don't look at the fundamentals of a bubble, just the technical's.  The math speaks to me louder than cries of any form of legitimacy.

Afterall, in the tulip bulb mania of 1636-7...how did someone convince their wife to purchase a tulip bulb for a years wages?   

"I think 11k"  "10k might".  This is the problem with opinions.  We base them on our own experience and assumptions.  Most of us make just about every decision in our life based on assumption.  Yet do not even realize it.  Scary stuff...

All stories aside...If we wait patiently just a short while longer...I "am assuming" based on many years of experience...BTC will tell us exactly what it intends to do.  It is at that juncture...where an opinion based on facts can be assessed.  For me...I've never seen an ounce of intrinsic value here and didn't give it a second thought.  For others...well, they can believe whatever they want to believe.

I've never felt intelligent enough to tell other people what they should do with their own hard earned capital.  I developed this "opinion" when being lambasted about religion.  I was watching the spit coming out of this gentlemen's mouth as he was telling me I was damned to go to hell and I thought to myself...I've been a God fearing man all of my life...how does this man KNOW the mind of God and can speak for Him?  He knows enough about the Bible/God/Religion to feel he can condemn another man to hell because I don't belong/comprehend/understand his particular viewpoint?  Again...Scary Stuff.

It was right then and there...I realized...I don't know enough about anything to influence other men in one direction or another.  It's hard enough work to be responsible for just me...  .

Speaking of me.  Again...It has been my opinion...The Cryptocurrencies are nothing more than a "Sign of the Times".

Best Regards,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Oct 7, 2019)

Theoretical quantum resistant encryption algorithms have been proposed and even developed into working models a few years ago for blockchain technology.  It's all documented in open source although not really a hot topic anymore after everyone saw it was working....  and well..  no way to test it.

Banking grade encryption would fail prior to that though.


----------



## Vayra86 (Oct 7, 2019)

Liquid Cool said:


> Lynx...I started in the financial world at six years old...that is five decades ago.  I've since been forced to retire due to my health.
> 
> That doesn't keep me from a lifelong interest in market bubbles.  I don't look at the fundamentals of a bubble, just the technical's.  The math speaks to me louder than cries of any form of legitimacy.
> 
> ...



Couldn't agree with you more. I think that is the perfect definition of what crypto is. In good and bad ways, too.

Good - I still believe there are elements to crypto that should and probably will be copied to the regular currency/transaction market.

But the biggest thing crypto contains IMO is the blockchain. Its a useful technology - not necessarily for financials but for data authenticity.



yakk said:


> Theoretical quantum resistant encryption algorithms have been proposed and even developed into working models a few years ago for blockchain technology.  It's all documented in open source although not really a hot topic anymore after everyone saw it was working....  and well..  no way to test it.
> 
> Banking grade encryption would fail prior to that though.



Yeah. Blockchain is mostly useful I think for non-financial transactions like following goods (or data) along a supply chain. In those capacities it remains 'small' enough to be a very cheap way to control and monitor things.


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Oct 8, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Yeah. Blockchain is mostly useful I think for non-financial transactions like following goods (or data) along a supply chain. In those capacities it remains 'small' enough to be a very cheap way to control and monitor things.



I thought so too at first, a while ago I did do some digging into technicals and did not see blockchain as useful for much of anything which does not need to be decentralized, and turns out not many things actually do.  There's a heavy cost to using blockchain in both time and energy which is intrinsic to it's engineered use case; a decentralized medium of exchange.  A company thinking of using blockchain is probably better served by a standard centralized database which is multiple times more efficient.  Also, using a private blockchain is pointless.

Authentification could be a use case, Microsoft is actively working on the Bitcoin blockchain as the foundation for their permanent online ID project.  They chose Bitcoin for the massive computing power securing that blockchain.  It'll be interesting to see how that project develops.


----------



## potato580+ (Oct 8, 2019)

nope, i can see my future alr good, no need for gambling on unpredicitible btc


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2019)

yakk said:


> I thought so too at first, a while ago I did do some digging into technicals and did not see blockchain as useful for much of anything which does not need to be decentralized, and turns out not many things actually do.  There's a heavy cost to using blockchain in both time and energy which is intrinsic to it's engineered use case; a decentralized medium of exchange.  A company thinking of using blockchain is probably better served by a standard centralized database which is multiple times more efficient.  Also, using a private blockchain is pointless.
> 
> Authentification could be a use case, Microsoft is actively working on the Bitcoin blockchain as the foundation for their permanent online ID project.  They chose Bitcoin for the massive computing power securing that blockchain.  It'll be interesting to see how that project develops.




I'm still not sure why I understand everyone loves blockchain in regards to copyright protection possibilities, etc. Aren't there so many transactions on the blockchain any given day its basically impossible to keep track of it all? I imagine even the IRS trying to audit someones blockchain would take months even for just a small time business owner... or is there like a search database that would show x amount of numbers related to y blockchain that was protected under Z copyright... and you can search the entire block chain for Z copyright to see if anyone stole your work? Is that the idea? I guess I don't get it. 

If we ignore copyright and go into financials... I see the same problem, like its billions/trillions of recorded transactions, is it even possible to search the database to trace it all? *The benefit of block chain is the ability everything is on the same record, but if that record is not searchable easily... doesn't that defeat the point? Or again... and I understanding it wrong?

@R-T-B @FordGT90Concept *


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Oct 8, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> I'm still not sure why I understand everyone loves blockchain in regards to copyright protection possibilities, etc. Aren't there so many transactions on the blockchain any given day its basically impossible to keep track of it all? I imagine even the IRS trying to audit someones blockchain would take months even for just a small time business owner... or is there like a search database that would show x amount of numbers related to y blockchain that was protected under Z copyright... and you can search the entire block chain for Z copyright to see if anyone stole your work? Is that the idea? I guess I don't get it.
> 
> If we ignore copyright and go into financials... I see the same problem, like its billions/trillions of recorded transactions, is it even possible to search the database to trace it all? *The benefit of block chain is the ability everything is on the same record, but if that record is not searchable easily... doesn't that defeat the point? Or again... and I understanding it wrong?
> 
> @R-T-B @FordGT90Concept *



Blockchains can be very, very, very searchable and record every single transaction ever taken place on it.  One of the biggest challenges is to conceal transactions for privacy while proving the limit of tokens exists.  Meaning if Bitcoin wasn't searchable, how could the code prove only 21 million will ever exist?  That's the biggest downfall of privacy alt coins like Monero, if they are private, an unlimited number of them can easily be centrally produced and no one would know except value would never rise due to inflation.

Bitcoin having the biggest amount of distributed computational power verifying the blockchain continuosly makes it the most secure of the blockchains available and attractive as proof authentification nobody can control, confiscate, or change.

Another interesting project is secure distributed AI code being worked on.  The AI code itself is distributed and secure.


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 8, 2019)

yakk said:


> Blockchains can be very, very, very searchable and record every single transaction ever taken place on it.  One of the biggest challenges is to conceal transactions for privacy while proving the limit of tokens exists.  Meaning if Bitcoin wasn't searchable, how could the code prove only 21 million will ever exist?  That's the biggest downfall of privacy alt coins like Monero, if they are private, an unlimited number of them can easily be centrally produced and no one would know except value would never rise due to inflation.
> 
> Bitcoin having the biggest amount of distributed computational power verifying the blockchain continuosly makes it the most secure of the blockchains available and attractive as proof authentification nobody can control, confiscate, or change.
> 
> Another interesting project is secure distributed AI code being worked on.  The AI code itself is distributed and secure.



Can you give me an example of how bitcoin can be searched? where. how?


----------



## notb (Oct 8, 2019)

OMG. Necroposting about a necrosubject.

There's really no need to spend so much time thinking if crypto is the future and ask other people who don't know as well.

The single important question here is: what problems does a cryptocurrency solve?
And once you find one (good luck), you have to estimate how much money can be earned from it.
You'll still waste time, but at least the approach will be correct.

Blockchain, i.e. a consistent distributed data storage, is here to stay, but we won't notice it in everyday life.


----------



## las (Oct 8, 2019)

Haha, no. Crypto is already dead.

I always laugh when I think back when McAfee claimed BTC would be 1 million by 2020.

I know so many people that lost thousands of dollars. People bought them up (while McAfee and everyone praising BTC, were selling hahaha)


----------



## Deleted member 158293 (Oct 9, 2019)

lynx29 said:


> Can you give me an example of how bitcoin can be searched? where. how?



There are lots of public blockchain explorers like HTTPS://tradeblock.com/Bitcoin/explorer or Https://live.blockcypher.com/btc.  A lot of people also make their own from GitHub code.

Every transaction has a tag and to-from addresses, a coin's transaction path can be traced from address to address.  It's quite transparent unless someone takes steps to have some privacy.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Oct 9, 2019)

quirky said:


> I am wondering whether I should invest or not. Everyone is talking about it but I am a bit scared. If I can't feel the money I will stress out. My question is do you think that this trend will last long and is it a good idea to invest or not?
> 
> PS I don't know much about it, I have yet to get the hang of it so excuse me if you find my question stupid.



Read This:









						What You Must Understand First, Before You Can Truly Understand Bitcoin
					

That’s a long title, isn’t it? In fact, leaving the title long wasn’t an oversight — no, it was a necessity for three reasons:




					medium.com
				




Also I recommend "The Little Bitcoin Book" on Amazon.  If you aren't willing to put in the effort to read a little about something you say you think may be "big," then I would argue you shouldn't bother.



las said:


> Haha, no. Crypto is already dead.
> 
> I know so many people that lost thousands of dollars. People bought them up (while McAfee and everyone praising BTC, were selling hahaha)



^Wow, this comment won't age well.  Every single year the Bitcoin low has been higher than the previous year (*including this year kids*).  Not saying Bitcoin is immortal or will last forever (nothing does), but it's an objective fact that Bitcoin is the opposite of dead.


----------



## Dominique (Feb 27, 2020)

An interesting fact: in many sources, analysts, answering a question about the future of cryptocurrencies, for some reason try to predict the price. But it is logical that the price directly depends on how much blockchain technology can become interesting, applicable in practice and integrated into everyday life. Therefore, it is precisely on what practical value this technology will have, how secure it will be, convenient, safe, inexpensive, and its future depends. For example, the same Bitcoin or Ripple. These are payment systems with their unique developments, existing not for the first year. Nevertheless, they still can not compete with Visa, MasterCard or with electronic wallets, or with SWIFT. I have one farm in my property in Athens but I don't have it as a main source of money.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 27, 2020)

Dominique said:


> Nevertheless, they still can not compete with Visa, MasterCard or with electronic wallets, or with SWIFT.


I don't think commercial wire exchanges permit the sort of ddos tactics used to jack up cryptocurrency market shares.


----------



## damian246 (Aug 20, 2020)

Liquid Cool said:


> No, I believe they are nothing more than a symptom of the present.


You are not alone and most crypto Firms have some hard explaining to do as they are reaching adolescence by now.


----------



## AsRock (Aug 20, 2020)

Don't like leaving money in the bank never mind trusting Crypto,  so i hope not. 

They are trying still to get rid of coins and paper money as is.


----------



## mtcn77 (Aug 20, 2020)

damian246 said:


> You are not alone and most crypto Firms have some hard explaining to do as they are reaching adolescence by now.


I had this attitude carrying friend who tried to sell me on the idea. Sadly, I turned it down with an inference and this is the hard lesson when the value got /2.


----------



## Hemmingstamp (Aug 21, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> I had this attitude carrying friend who tried to sell me on the idea. Sadly, I turned it down with an inference and this is the hard lesson when the value got /2.



Look up the term 'Digital Dollar' because you may not have a choice in the future.


----------



## mtcn77 (Aug 21, 2020)

Hemmingstamp said:


> Look up the term 'Digital Dollar' because you may not have a choice in the future.


Well, that wasn't a sarcasm switch at the end. I was being obtuse for the regular folk.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 21, 2020)

AsRock said:


> They are trying still to get rid of coins and paper money as is.



In the world we are living in now, I don't see any reason that'd be a bad thing.  Money/CASH is litterally a germ avenue for COVID, plus it's just inconvienient 90% of the time.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Aug 21, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> Money/CASH



I know China is looking into a digital dollar and was just reading recently that the U.S. is staring to look into it also but do you think physical money/cash will ever be obsolete?

What do people do with all their Cash notes (stashed at home for instance) when it becomes digital?

Will there still be cash jobs? I know the Australian government will be very happy to eliminate cash jobs.

There is ample avenues to explore in this area of nascent technology before it can ever become mainstream.


----------



## AsRock (Aug 21, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> In the world we are living in now, I don't see any reason that'd be a bad thing.  Money/CASH is litterally a germ avenue for COVID, plus it's just inconvienient 90% of the time.



OMG this shit with COVID  a massive part of the deaths are fake, they are just whote up as covid deaths, they tried the shit when my sister died this march they asked my mother if they write her death up as one.

Hand sanitizer is not good either, it's making germs stronger kinda like not finishing antibiotics from your doctor.

Not having actual cash you can loose it all if shit does hit the fan.



Outback Bronze said:


> I know China is looking into a digital dollar and was just reading recently that the U.S. is staring to look into it also but do you think physical money/cash will ever be obsolete?
> 
> What do people do with all their Cash notes (stashed at home for instance) when it becomes digital?
> 
> ...



Same goes for most other country's too,  more tax dollers to take of the people more control over them.


----------



## mtcn77 (Aug 21, 2020)

AsRock said:


> Hand sanitizer is not good either, it's making germs stronger kinda like not finishing antibiotics from your doctor.


Wash your hands with soap. Those virus spikes never found the ideal resistance to entrapment.


----------



## dorsetknob (Aug 21, 2020)

Outback Bronze said:


> What do people do with all their Cash notes (stashed at home for instance) when it becomes digital?


Convert to Gold.
In times of crises Gold is where money goes.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Aug 21, 2020)

dorsetknob said:


> Convert to Gold.
> In times of crises Gold is where money goes.


But that would be quite impractical wouldnt it?


----------



## neatfeatguy (Aug 21, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> In the world we are living in now, I don't see any reason that'd be a bad thing.  Money/CASH is litterally a germ avenue for COVID, plus it's just inconvienient 90% of the time.



It's one of the reasons the Covid scare is continuing to be pushed - to digitize money. Once money is digitized it's just a step closer to the idea that chipping will be a better way to handle your digital needs.

Digitize money - you're tracked 100%. You cannot vanish unless you completely drop off the digital world. This means because cash is no longer a valid payment option you have to be 100% self sufficient: access to your own water source, handle your own food source, find a way to have your own electricity (wind powered or solar powered would be my guess) and so on. 

You can make arguments that you're always tracked, especially if you have a cell phone. But digitizing money takes it to a whole new level. I can turn off my cell phone or get rid of it should I feel it necessary....but digitizing money....I'm kind of paranoid as it is and I avoid social media like the plague. I don't want to to be 100% tracked all the time and I don't want everyone to know all my info. So, maybe I'm a bit odd here, but I hope digitizing money doesn't happen.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 21, 2020)

AsRock said:


> OMG this shit with COVID  a massive part of the deaths are fake, they are just whote up as covid deaths, they tried the shit when my sister died this march they asked my mother if they write her death up as one.
> 
> Hand sanitizer is not good either, it's making germs stronger kinda like not finishing antibiotics from your doctor.
> 
> ...



Cool conspiracy bro.

I mean I know it's a crypto thread, but we've firmly entered crazy territory, so I'm going away now.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Sep 6, 2020)

In the meantime , over these past few days the exchange rate dropped from ~£8864 to ~£7684.
My rig just earned over £10 and yet , only be keeping at it it's still over that amount, hobby stuff.


----------



## ThrashZone (Sep 6, 2020)

Liquid Cool said:


> To get on topic.....
> 
> Do you think Cryptocurrencies are the future?
> 
> ...


Hi,
As soon as governments can insure they can seize/ tax/... it somewhere it might


----------

