/biz/ - Business & Finance

>start ups
An actual, regulated, honest-to-goodness bitcoin bank that performs bank operations.

>>548012
I was thinking something more on the line of let's say replacing check cashing services first. Integrate bitcoin in urban areas where people's banking options are limited

>>548034
Those people will not be interested in Bitcoin.

>mfw pnd coin does instant transactions so it'd be perfect for casinos

>>548009

I have an idea, you tell me if it's feasible or has already been done.

I would like to see a system that treats Bitcoin transactions like torrents. Say I wanted to send one to another address, rather than sending it directly, the system would send a quarter to a separate address, a tenth to yet another, etc., then direct another set of addresses to send the total of one to the address I intended. This might be done on a set or random time delay, up to a maximum time between the ordered transaction and its completion.

It could be done for a fee, or perhaps everyone who wanted to join, as a cost of the service, had to allow others' transactions to pass through their account as well.

I think with enough volume the transactions would become effectively anonymous, the implications of which are obvious.

Thoughts?

bitcoin currency exchanges at the airport

>>548331
Sounds like money laundering. Oy vey shut it down.

>>548331
1. Fees would make it costly
2. Sidechains make it pretty pointless

>>548344

>Sounds like money laundering.

No, of course not, that would be illegal.

>>548347

>2. Sidechains make it pretty pointless

My thought on sidechains was that they would still be, uh, traceable by an interested party who could watch the exact amounts and times of the transactions. I'm not an expert on them, obviously.

Pandacoin is the future. Better than bitcoin in every way.

>>548034
They won´t be able to afford even one bitcoin

>>548340
OMG YES....

>>548331
How would multiple people have the same sale to torrent?

This wouldn't be very good for real time transactions

>>548049
>implying I'd risk my PNDs

>>548049
>so you can use scam money to get scammed

>>548367
This just in... hold on folks I am receiving a live update.... PND is down 10% today.... Bitcoin is up 8%...

In other recent news the person I am responding to is a giant faggot. Back to you in the studio, Bob.

I made a thread at ~$330 to try and warn you guys, but all I got were 'fuck off shill' replies so I fucked off.

Once we crack $400 we're going parabolic again within months.

>>548040
wrong
>>548012
the reason bitcoin is popular is because its a bank you can carry around.
>>548034
good idea
>>548340
I talk to the currency exchangers every time I fly, so far only a few had heard of it previously.

>>548618
>'fuck off shill' replies
Fuck off shill
>wrong
Right. Those people wash cash they can spend locally. Bitcoin is not for them.
>Bitcoin is a bank you can carry around
Not really, no. Your Bitcoin wallet is not an intermediary financial institution that pools account-holder funds to issue loans and perform other vital services. It's more like sticking cash under your mattress, just you aren't restricted to local purchases.

>>548331
You literally just described coin mixing.

Coin mixers have been around since 2010 and have a pretty general 1% fee.

haha bought 7.5 btc at $340 the other day. BTC now at $400. Incoming parabolic gains.

Thanks PND shills for making me realize bitcoin is the true coin. Altcoins are failure

>>548646
Welcome to the club brother.

I want to shit on pandacoin really hard, but its already so buried in shit that its pointless.

>>548628
I'm not going to fuck off, I didn't start the thread. Also, shills get paid, I just make returns.

>Those people wash cash they can spend locally
So all we need now is for businesses to start taking bitcoin. They aren't disinterested in bitcoin.

Your point about loans is fair. But FRB is going to die out in the Bitcoin economy. What is the vital service you think banks provide that bitcoin can't from a native wallet.

>>548655
>shills get paid, I just make returns
You have a financial incentive to try to convince more people to buy BTC. You might not be directly paid, but there isn't much difference.
>all we need now is for businesses to start taking bitcoin. They aren't disinterested in Bitcoin.
Chicken and egg and they are until it's shown otherwise. I'm fairly confident a Bitcoin check cashing business at this point in time would fail in short order.
>FRB is going to die out in the Bitcoin economy
No it wouldn't. Banks would be able to offer customers interest and insurance as incentive and nothing about Bitcoin itself prevents FRB.
>vital service you think banks provide
Pooled lending and insured deposits are the big ones. They're pretty important. You could try to claim p2p lending could be used, but I'd argue that people are not savvy and willing enough to responsibly lend with enough volume to replace bank lending (plus you'd then effectively have a full reserve system, which has its own special problems).

>>548668
>isn't much difference.
The difference is that I actually believe in Bitcoin, and if I get returns, so would they.
>Chicken and egg
true
>I'm fairly confident a Bitcoin check cashing business at this point in time would fail in short order.
probably, but eventually that won't be true, so its better to set one up now than to wait for the time to come when it makes sense to, only to be late to the game.
>Banks would be able to offer customers interest and insurance as incentive
This is a really complicated topic, explaining why that isn't true will take a few posts.
>nothing about Bitcoin itself prevents FRB
Except for the limited number that exist
>Pooled lending
Essentially analogous to crowd funding at this point.
>insured deposits
How is this a vital service? You know how Bitcoin works right?
>You could try to claim p2p lending could be used
I've even used it before.
>I'd argue that people are not savvy and willing enough to responsibly lend with enough volume to replace bank lending
This is certainly true, but it isn't inherently a problem.
> you'd then effectively have a full reserve system, which has its own special problems
You're probably right, but what problems?

>>548681
>except for the limited number that exist
That doesn't prevent FRB. You deposit 10 BTC, the bank holds 1 BTC and lends out 9 BTC. That 9 BTC is deposited, the bank holds 0.9 BTC and lends out 8.1 BTC. That 8.1 BTC is deposited. Only 10 actual BTC exist, but there are 27.1 BTC in the system. Not being able to make more BTC on demand just makes it inelastic (you can have elastic or inelastic FRB or elastic or inelastic full reserve banking).
>essentially analogous to crowd funding
Not really, no.
>How is this a vital service?
Consumer confidence. People lose BTC all the time. Yes, it's true that a savvy user can protect against that, but the simple fact is that most people will not be savvy users. If even early adopters can lose BTC, imagine what will happen to average Joe.
>I've even used it before
So have I. It's a supplement, not a substitute.
>isn't inherently a problem
It is if you want a healthy economy.
>what problems?
Complicated topic involving how demand vs term accounts influence behavior and unregulated pseudo-banks that would form to fill the gap.

>>548688
What happens when I withdraw my 10 BTC?

Even if its not analogous, crowd funding can replace a lot of lending.

>>548699
In that exact situation? The bank would either need to borrow reserves from another bank (perhaps even from a bank created specifically for that purpose... I wonder what that would be called?) or it would be illiquid. That part of it is no different from today. In this case the bank is betting that you're not going to use more than 10% of your balance before the loan is repaid.

>>548699
>crowd funding can replace a lot of lending
In theory, maybe. In reality, no way. It would be a drop in the bucket.

BTC a $410. Nearly $100 up from two weeks ago.

>mfw PND still hovering at 9 satoshi

>>548703
Oh wait, haha, actually in my example the bank has enough to pay out the 10 BTC, it just wouldn't have any reserves left and would be illiquid if someone was behind you in line.

>>548708
As BTC prize goes up so does every alt coin traiding with BTC. That being said expect a lot of people to dump in favor of BTC. It's also at 425 now. I might grab a couole when prize goes down to 5 sat again.

I've seen a lot of people on /biz/ telling others to short BTC.

So how many of you just got fucked inside out?

$435 and rising.

>>548739
It's probably those PND dudes. They have been proven to be as retarded as retarded gets.

>>548009

make bitcoins irl like solid gold+ very complicated secure

>shorting bitcoin

Hahahah only /biz/ faggots would be stupid enough to do this

>>548963
>holding bitcoin
>not stupid

>>548998
I love posts like these, because eventually you will be proven wrong, and have to live with it.

>>549109
Or, or you'll be proven wrong and have to live with the fact that you put your money into a ponzi.
>CHEAP COINZ AT 800
I'd rather take a bet on which exchange is about to mt gox.

>>548733

>he still thinks PND is going to work even if it goes down to 5 satoshi

How stupid are you?

>>549127
I've already made more money with Bitcoin than I spent on college.

At this point it wouldn't even matter if it failed, but I know it won't because I am paying attention.

>>549165
You realize that a lot of people who pay attention don't think it has a future, right? Not everyone who knows about it embraces it.

>>549182

:^)

your loss buddy.

new bubble is forming.

You'd be stupid not to have a little btc

>>549182
>Not everyone who knows about it embraces it.
>knows about it
Depends on what you mean by 'knows about it'.

Bitcoin is complicated.

mfw no one realized dogecoindark is the only coin with a darknet, and it just popped up under the radar.. fuckin irc channel is insane.. like 100+ ppl n shit fuckin throwin coins everywhere

>>548012

>yes goy! let me regulate your crypto currency that was designed to not be regulated/controlled!! Just like your money!!

>>548049

Can't wait until PND goes through the roof.

>>549194
I'm not interested in speculative bubbles. They have a habit of bursting.
>>549213
You don't need to be intimately familiar with the code and detailed minutia if that's what you're saying. You just need to know how it works on the general level.
>>549226
Exactly. Regulation is necessary if you people are serious about this.

>these people actually think BTC didn't only go up because it was mentioned on the news with silkroad.

>>548595
>>548521
>>548646
>>548655
>>548708
>>548742
>>549131
>>549182

You guys sound pretty butt-mad. If fate takes PND down, my shekels will go down with it, but I wont dump. I have faith.

>>549245
so THATs where it came from

>>549245
I share the enthusiasm and care for the vision of PND, and I will go down with the ship if time tells that I must. #teamPND #foreverPND #TO_THE_MOON

>>548496

>How would multiple people have the same sale to torrent?

They wouldn't, the service would create a series of transactions that effectively replicated the conditions of a single transaction (i.e., the sender would be less a certain amount, the recipient would gain that same amount, and a whole bunch of people in between would have no net change).

>This wouldn't be very good for real time transactions

It's a tradeoff for anonymity. Most people who use online wallets aren't able to transact in real-time anyway.

>>549384
This is something you can already do by yourself, just generate a bunch of addresses, bounce your transaction around, and then send it.

>>549245

I wonder who is behind that mod account!

>>548739
I got fucked hard. Talked to my tax preparer about my Bitcoin, and said I was in a loss position. He said to sell, realize the loss for tax purposes, and reinvest at a lower level. I use coinbase, and sold Monday. My funds won't come back in until Friday, and I'm back at the level my coins were at. If it continues up, I'm at a hell of a loss vs. just hodling.

>>548347

>implying total anonymity would not be worth a fee.

Because anonymity was never the foundation of success for BTC's... or wait..

>>549648
It's alright dude. Bitcoin is already on its way back down.

>>548009

Anything involving paypal and BTC would be huge. The hype isn't as strong anymore, but that is mostly because the majority of people are too stupid to figure out how to buy a bitcoin.

If you could buy bitcoins with paypal, normalfags would be 100% checkm8d

>>549747
That really should be a thing. Besides buying cryptocurrency at an inflated price on eBay, Pandacoin is the only cryptocurrency that works this way.

>>549759
Works what way?

>>549761
>If you could buy bitcoins with paypal
BuyPND works this way. Sorry, I should have been more clear.

No it doesn't look like you can buy Bitcoins on buyPND. Isn't that the scam site anyways?

PND is the underdog that inevitably wins, can't wait to buy a car

>>549768
I never said one could buy Bitcoin on BuyPND; I was merely mentioning the site's functionality. If Pandacoin can be purchased with Paypal through a website, then a site should exist where the same can be done with Bitcoin.

>>549775
There have been many sites where people have tried to sell Bitcoin through Paypal. They don't work because it's against Paypals TOS. That PND website is just too new so they have yet to fail yet.

>mfw there might be bitcoin bubble #4 soon

Anyone else excited? Bitcoin bubbles are my favourite form of entertainment.

>>549953
yes.

I'm tempted to take out a loan

ayy lmao

>tfw PND turned out to be a scam

>>548618
>Once we crack $400 we're going parabolic again within months.

Someone just dumped close to a quarter of a million worth of bitcoin onto the market, in a desperate attempt to get their money back from this train-wreck of a "currency."

>>549984
it's way too early to make that decision
I hold very few altcoin, mostly DOGE, and have most of my free money in BTC, but if the new update is promising I'll have to consider getting a few million PND just in case.

>>549990
Maybe you should look at a longer time scale

Also have a look at dat volume, crypto ain't dead

>>550002
>manipulating charts this hard

The charts that bitcoiners put out are hilarious, some retard literally put a rainbow over a log scale of bitcoins price, and leddit uboated it to the top.

>>550010
What the fuck are you talking about?

This is unedited data taken from an exchange

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/btcchina/btccny

>>550012
Don't worry about it, they're retarded.
>>549990
>dumped a quarter million
>still above $400
Even if we go under $400 it won't matter, the bull market is on.

>>550024
>Even if we go under $400 it won't matter, the bull market is on.
>peopleactuallybelievethis dot jay peg

>>550033
You're forgetting some things.

1. The more dumping, and the more intense it is, the stronger the rally will be for having lost the weak hands.
2. This is something that will resolve with time, you can laugh at me now, but I have 75 bitcoins.
3. There is no reason for Bitcoin to fail

>>550040
Number 2 is obvious (everything resolves with time). Number 1 is just downright untrue (a steep fall does not imply a rally of any sort) and number 3 is debatable.

>>550044
>a steep fall does not imply a rally of any sort

It 100% does after a bull run with this kind of volume.

I've been following the bitcoin price since it was $3 and I've never seen such a strong indicator.

Unless some mega bears come out and push us below 350 this rally will continue.

>>549235

My impression is that because of the recent attention BTC has received a fair amount of people are holding, decreasing the available pool at a time of demand.

basic bitch tier economics imo.

>>550010
He's talking about how you used a logarithmic scale for that chart? And how it shows Bitcoins value in Chinese Yuan.
Here's what you posted without bullshit manipulation.

>>550012
He's talking about how you used a logarithmic scale for that chart? And how it shows Bitcoins value in Chinese Yuan.
Here's what you posted without bullshit manipulation.

>>550607
>not using log charts

http://www.fool.com/foolfaq/foolfaqcharts.htm

>using linear charts on /biz/

And the currencies tend to follow each other, I just posted the exchange with the highest volume recently.

>>550612
In other news, the real bubbles are begging to pop here in the UK

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/uk-house-prices-slowdown-what-housing-market-experts-think-1474705

>>548009
A quick run-down on near-future bitcoin use:

>multi credit card "smart cards" that store multiple forms of payment on a single programmable card device

>bitcoin gets added as a payment method

>bitcoin is used a lot more

As of now the new smart omni-cards are being attacked by shit like Apple pay.
Jewish establishment does not want to lose this race, it seems.

>>550624
>bitcoin is used alot more.

>>550639
All your posts are just shitty reaction images and green texting, why should anyone give a fuck what you think?

>>550612
You do realise the only reason Bitcoins value shot up to over $1200, is because of market manipulation from Mt. Gox?
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/report-mtgox-fraud-led-to-1200-bitcoin-price/
Bitcoin isn't going to magically rise in value by 1000%+ just because of "mah log graphs!"
Pull your head out of your ass, god damn.

>>551046
>mtgox

Hahaha yeah buddy.

A market that had 80% of the volume last year that's now gone and yet we have maintained value over 90% of 2013 for the whole year to date.

Mtgox is old news.

The real drivers now are China

>>551048
>yet we have maintained value over 90% of 2013 for the whole year to date.
wot

>>550122
>Unless some mega bears come out and push us below 350 this rally will continue.
How does it feel to be so wrong all the time?

>>551051
The price from January to November in 2013 has been lower than the whole of 2014 to date.

Do you need me to explain this further?

>>551054
Ahh, I got you now. The way you worded it was just really retarded.

So what you are saying is that if you bought more than a year ago you are solid, but if you bought almost any time in 2014 you are fucked? Sounds about right.

>>551048
It's only retained that value because of all the suckers (like you) who blew their savings on buying bitcoins/bitcoin miners back at the start of the year, thinking it would be going TO THE MOON
Now they're all trying to get their money back.

>>551053
Feels pretty good being right most of the time.

As I said I started following bitcoin when it was in single digits.

Yes I've had some shitty calls, I sold a lot of my bitcoins around $35-50~ on the rally to $266 which I had to buy back at a really steep lose.

I've also predicted rallies which haven't come to light.

But from my experience it is far safer to buy and hold than to speculate on the price.

I find it interesting you can ask how it feels to be wrong most of the time when for the past few years bitcoin has seen growth in the tens of thousands of percent, out performing every stock and commodity on the market.

And this growth is still forecast by many speculators and shows no sign of slowing.

But you do what you want, ultimately it's your money and your missed opportunity.

>>551059
> when for the past few years bitcoin has seen growth in the tens of thousands of percent
Not this year, that's for sure. The Bitcoin bubble has popped sir. Nobody here is saying that you couldn't have made money in 2013 or previous, but if you made money in 2014 on Bitcoin? Wow, you got really damn lucky.

>>551057
>>551062
If you had bought in at June 2011 you would have had to wait almost 2 years in order to see your money back.

You would have also seen your value go down by a factor of 5, from 32 dollars to 2 dollars in that time.

This 2014 bear market pales in comparison and it amazes me we have suffered so very little, I'm proven wrong time and time again just how resilient bitcoin is.

>>551064
>>551062
I mean seriously.

Look at the 2011 bubble deflate.

It makes 2014 look like a walk in the park

>>551064
Are you COMPLETLY fucking ignoring my post?
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/report-mtgox-fraud-led-to-1200-bitcoin-price/

This isn't a "bear market", it's suckers like you buying up bitcoin at a horribly inflated price, and who are all trying to get back their wasted investment.

>>551064
There is a big problem with that statement. Nobody knew about Bitcoin in June 2011 and it was almost worthless. Now everyone knows about it. We are not going to see that type of growth ever again, if we see any type of growth at all. Taking the last year into account, Bitcoin user base isn't growing as much, trade volume is down, and ultimately price is down. Bitcoin is stagnating and has been for a while.

>>551066
>horribly inflated price

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/raoul-pal-thinks-bitcoin-price-will-be-100000-or-1000000/


An article from the EXACT same source as yours.

Mtgox is old news.

>>551067
How do you get that idea?

>>551067
if anything we've seen a growth higher than that of any point in between bubbles in history.

Usually after a price rise like the end of last year we would usually deflate, this is the first time I've seen the opposite.

>>551069
You really think the number of "my wallet" accurately shows the real number of users? Tell me this then, how many of them have less than 1 mBTC?

>>551070
Number of transactions does not = trade volume which is really the only metric that matters when we are measuring liquidity.

>>551067
I mean if you really want to look at a good indicator of how well bitcoin is doing look at the hash rate, if it was declining we would see rigs getting turned off.

The exact opposite is happening

>>551068
Are you seriously this FUCKING retarded?
You posted a graph showing the value of bitcoins traded on Mt. Gox...
And Bitcoin only went up over $1200, because of market manipulation by Mt. Gox
Why do you think Bitcoin traded on Mt. Gox suddenly shot up in value from a few dollars, to $30? Then crashed back to a few dollars afterwards.
It's almost as if... it's happening again. But now there isn't Mt. Gox here to artificially inflate the price anymore.

>>551071
Okay, fair enough.

A better chart is number of unique bitcoin addresses used as it cuts out the thousands of micro transactions that bitcoin is used for.

>>551073
Doesn't mean anything either. A lot of miners are mining at a loss (we know this because the hash rate goes up even though the price goes down). Also you have a big mining consortium in China now where they are piggybacking off of government provided electricity. Hashrate means nothing.

>>551074
Mtgox has been dead for almost a year now,

If it was the only thing keeping the price going why are we above 30 dollars like you predict?

Why aren't we stable in the single digits?

If it was just one big conspiracy by mtgox why do people still buy it?

>>551076
HD wallets due to more mobile apps. A few mobile Bitcoin apps generate a Bitcoin address per transaction. Off the top of my head I know Mycelium does this as well as Schildbach's wallet app.

In laymen's terms this means one user has multiple unique addresses.

>>551082
Okay fair enough.

So I ask why is it increasing?

Surely if bitcoin was dead and the bubble has popped why would we be seeing an increase in wallets?

>>551081
He's kinda got a point. As soon as MtGox went defunct we have seen a consistent price drop. I feel like the only reason it hasn't dropped more is that there is a lot refusal to accept that Bitcoin bubble has popped. The holdouts are trying to prop up the price but haven't had much success over the last year. It is going to take a serious(!) amount of money to reverse this downward trend.

>>551084
I mean, if we were stagnating on usability why are there more transactions being sent per block than there was back when we were at 1200?

>>551085
>It is going to take a serious(!) amount of money to reverse this downward trend.

Have you seen the volume figures coming out of China?

There has been more transacted in USD terms in a day then there has been in the whole year of 2011.

Bitcoin is FAR from dead.

>>551085
When I hear people say the bitcoin bubble has popped it reminds me of reading this article for the first time in 2011.

At least back then I was more inclined to believe you.

I've been proven wrong, I thought there is no fucking way we are ever going to see double digits for years, never mind hundreds and if you had told me we were going to reach $1000 I would have taken you to a psycho ward.

I'm not even joking.

http://www.wired.com/2011/11/mf_bitcoin/all/

>>551084
I don't know. I personally think there are still an amount of laggards in 2nd world countries. Enough to add more users to the network but not enough wealth to move the price, or significantly increase volume. Compounded with HD wallets and mobile apps it is giving the illusion that there are more users than there really are.

>>551089
>There has been more transacted in USD terms in a day then there has been in the whole year of 2011.
Which isn't saying much. In 2011 Bitcoin was relatively unknown and unused.

>>551097
Yup, so why is today, in 2014, bitcoin going to fade back into the unknown and unused?

More people know about it than ever.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-youll-finally-be-using-bitcoin-soon-2014-11-12

Remember, the price is cheap as chips right now, when the rally really picks up and bitcoin is all over the news again that's when your average dude on the street will be buying, not today and not yesterday.

>>551091
I wouldn't really consider 2011 to be anything to be honest. It was a small bubble but in general terms it was nothing compared to the media hype and price boost in the end of 2013. That would be like looking at 2004 when talking about the housing bubble. The real peak was in 2006.

>>551101
>Yup, so why is today, in 2014, bitcoin going to fade back into the unknown and unused?
It's not. I think there will always be diehards like you that keep it somewhat relevant and used. It is stagnating though and will continue to. I don't think anyone thinks Bitcoin will ever go away entirely unless it is fully replaced.

>>551103
Yeah you're right

A better comparison was in 2013,

Just out of curiosity did you watch/see/following bitcoin in the middle of 2013? When we pushed for the highs of $266?

>>551101
>when the rally really picks up and bitcoin is all over the news again that's when your average dude on the street will be buying
Really doubtful. Average Joe already knows about Bitcoin and has already formed an opinion on it.

>>551108
Yeah, sadly it's those guys who end up seeing new highs and jump in the latest and get burned the hardest.

This has probably been the most damaging over the years for bitcoin but from what I've seen it has left strong hands and the brass willed holding

Who knows what's going to happen though.

From what I've seen however the potential upsides far outweigh the potential downsides and to not hold any is a highly unadventurous endeavour,

likewise I laugh at anybody who holds nothing but bitcoin and 'has more than they can afford to lose'

>>551107
And just think. We are already back down to $390 which is a lot closer to $266 than it is to $1100. Even that last rally didn't last more than a day. The rallies have been getting shorter and shorter and the slumps have been getting longer and more pronounced.

>>551117
Yeah buddy, it's following your typical S curve for adoption, albeit far more 'wild'.

Eventually the rallies will get shorter and the drops far smaller (percentage wise) like they have been.

Remember just last year we saw the drop from $266 dollars to $60, that is a bigger drop than anything we have seen this year.

We've can only chart bitcoins progress for 5 years and look at where we are at already, in the grand scheme of things who knows where we could be at in a further 5? or 15?

>>550654
Because you're not worth a real response. that's how delusional you are. At this point I would actually be willing to bet you have a mental disorder. I want to save your posts so that way when this thing dies well have a case study in denial.

>>551120
>who knows where we could be at in a further 5? or 15?
Almost fully irrelevant unless Bitcoin can adapt. New payments platforms like Apple Pay are going to be the norm.

>>551122
>apple pay

My problem with anything like this is it brings back the reason for why people are so into bitcoin in the first place.

You don't need to trust a third party, you don't need to trust -anybody- with your own 'money'.

Be your own bank, it's truly a capitalistic and libertarian wet dream come true.

And it's something we as a species have not had in a very long time, power of our own finance.

>>551126
>My problem
Right. It's just your problem and not a universal one. The average person is not Libertarian. They will use technology like Apple Pay because it works really well with their iPhone and apps. Apple Pay will use terminology like "account" and "password" instead of "public key" and "private key". Apple Pay apps will be incredibly user friendly and they will have kiosks inside Apple Retail Stores where they showcase the features. A series of commercials will be launched with a catchy jingle. Marketing and branding will trump technology 9 out of 10 times. If you can't even acknowledge this then you are like most Bitcoin zealots that are unwilling to accept that Bitcoin still needs to adapt.

>>551138
But apple pay and things like it don't, and can't, solve all of problems that bitcoin does.

What bitcoin does is it allows everybody to hold, access and verify the ledger, this has so numerous benefits and in order for apple pay or any third party to do this it would no longer be an apple, or third party product.

If you think Apple can simply copy bitcoin and sell it as it's own you are missing something vital in the principles of what is a free decentralised network with no central authority.

Apple just circumvents problems like the double spend but doesn't offer any real solutions, it's just another flash in the pan for an already fading company.

The main difference with apple pay, if and when Apple dies apple pay dies with it.

Bitcoin doesn't have this problem, it will live forever so long as there is still users

>>551172
Everything you just said is from a Libertarians point of view. Most people don't care about decentralized networks or the fact that there are central authorities. The average person likes the fact that there is a regulating body making sure that there are consumer protections. Apple Pay isn't an end-all it is just an example of technological advances in personal finance. It is not a copy of Bitcoin and was never intended to be.

>it's just another flash in the pan for an already fading company
With a market cap of $668 billion and rising? You can't really be serious... right?

>>551138
Besides, I don't want one company to have a monopoly on our finances

Do you?

And to say it's just my problem and not a universal one is naive.

In order to send peoples money between a first world and a third world country costs well over 10% in fees, sometimes as much as 20%

Over half the worlds population is unbanked, which means they have no access to any secure and safe way of holding any wealth

And from steady decades of inflation since we dropped the gold standard people have seen their savings drop like a lead weight which only compounds our problem in a debt driven society.

To say these problems are my, or libertarian problems, is naive and verging on ignorant

Do you think the banks, or Apple wants to solve these problems?

>>551182
>thinking the apple stock is real

Good goy.

QE has done you wonders :^)

>>551183
>Besides, I don't want one company to have a monopoly on our finances
They won't. Apple Pay isn't the only advance in fintech out there. Apple also didn't force themselves on to the global atmosphere. They gained popularity because of solid products.

>since we dropped the gold standard people have seen their savings drop like a lead weight which only compounds our problem in a debt driven society
Now you sound like a gold bug. Inflation is healthy for any economy because it discourages hoarding (something that Bitcoin promotes).

>>551188
>thinking the apple stock is real
lolwot
How is it not real? lmao

>>551183
>Besides, I don't want one company to have a monopoly on our finances
>Unless it's GHash.IO

>>551196
>GHash.IO
https://blockchain.info/blocks

pls

>>551192
>thinking the apple stock is sustainable
$668 billion

Say that number in your head a few times

Yes it's doing great currently, but do you think $668 billion is a representative for a mainly phone and tablet tech company?

Stocks are the next thing to explode in this great game of 'what is your dollar really worth?'

>>551221
>gooby srsly pretending this didn't happen
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2364000/bitcoin-price-dips-as-backers-fear-mining-monopoly.html

>>551228
Total hashing power is around 300 Ph/s:
https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate
Total hashing power from GHash.IO is 56.94 Ph/s:
https://ghash.io/
https://blockchain.info/pools

Please kindly fuck off with your misinformation and reactionary comments.

If you're going to supply nothing of value to this thread then leave.

sticking with doge and doged. cant go wrong with the best of anon and regular crypto.

>>551221
>thinking the apple stock is sustainable
I absolutely think it is. Apple revenue is at $182 billion this year up from $172 billion last year. The company is strong and growing because of aggressive marketing, solid products and a huge consumer base due to brand loyalty.

>a mainly phone and tablet tech company
To call Apple a "phone and tablet" company is a misnomer and I am not even an Apple fanboy. They dominate the consumer electronics and computer hardware market. With the creation of the iPhone they jumped to the 3rd biggest mobile phone manufacturer. The iTunes store is also the largest music retailer and the iCloud and App Store provide the biggest online services in the world. Don't even forget Mac computers and a whole software suite. And now Apple Pay. There is a reason they are the tech giant they are today.

>Say that number in your head a few times
I find it interesting that you balk at a market cap of $668 billion for Apple but in the same thread you non-ironically link an article where someone proposes that Bitcoin could have a market cap of $21 trillion. That's pretty funny.

>>551344
I'd agree apple is doing great at the moment, but I don't think it's a sustainable business.

It's had too little time and crossed too few hurdles, what it does isn't innovative and most of their great ideas have been from the backs of other companies, but that is besides the point.

Apple is a company, weather it sold every phone, tablet, computer and laptop on the market it should still be nowhere near the world of finance.

I mean the whole "double charge" thing is just an example of how a company should not be this involved in personal wealth.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102111261#..

I'd class this in line with paypal where it suits a specific niche in the market but is not ultimately a replacement of banks. Bitcoin is a whole other kettle of fish and is incompatible to apple pay.

Apple pay attempts to shoddily copy just one aspect of what makes bitcoin great and doesn't even do it right, I think ripple has a better chance then apple pay personally but who knows how much apple will throw at it.

>non-ironically link an article

That link was to make the point that "cryptocoinnews" is a bullshit site with bullshit articles.

I don't mean to discredit Raoul Pal but I personally don't think we will ever see bitcoins value get anywhere close to that in our lifetimes.

>>551361
>'incompatible'
Sorry meant to say incomparable

Bitcoin and the blockchain does a hundred and one other things apple pay doesn't even touch on.

And ultimately this can't be simply copied, improved yes but not through a centralized third party like Apple I'm afraid.

>>551361
>but I don't think it's a sustainable business
Unfounded.

> it should still be nowhere near the world of finance
Unfounded.

>I mean the whole "double charge" thing
Every new tech has kinks that they need to work through. This seemed like a very small blip. I also wouldn't bring up double charges as a valid pro-Bitcoin argument because almost every single Bitcoin exchange has been plagued with double spend issues.

>where it suits a specific niche in the market but is not ultimately a replacement of banks
Apple Pay isn't trying to replace banks like Bitcoin says they are. They have plans to use the platform in tandem with banks.

> shoddily copy just one aspect of what makes bitcoin great
Apple is in no way trying to copy Bitcoin. If Bitcoin had never existed there would still have been advances in fintech. Bitcoin is flawed. I don't even think it was ever meant to be a long term solution, just a trial run in testing new cryptographic viability. Everything about Bitcoin including the elliptical curves, SHA-256, and RNGs used for public keys came out of the minds of cryptographers from MIT heavily involved with the NSA and government agencies. To think it has now become a Libertarian movement and that you guys are such blind devotees is ironic.

>2014
>cryptocurrencies

>>551391
Welp okay, to be honest I couldn't care less about Apple.

I personally don't think apple pay is suitable to everybody's everyday demands but who knows, I thought it would have died years ago before the iPhone was even released.

And what I love about SHA-256 and it's its role in hashing is just how transparent and secure it is.

There is no backdoor and the open source nature of it means nobody is going to run off while you are left holding the bag.

Just on a side I think fireworks might be going off tonight, keep an eye on it I think we're in for a treat.

https://bitcoinwisdom.com/markets/btcchina/btccny

>>548009

>>551406
>Welp okay, to be honest I couldn't care less about Apple
Honestly.. I couldn't care less about Apple either. I was just using Apple Pay as one single example in a long line of financial tech advancements. Bitcoin proposes to have all the solutions but no internal issues which is really closed minded. I personally think Bitcoin is going to have to adapt dramatically in order to come out ahead of the curve. I just don't think they will because how can you fix flaws in the protocol if nobody will admit they even exist in the first place?

>SHA-256 and it's its role in hashing is just how transparent and secure it is.
I agree that SHA-256 is relatively secure (although if anyone is going to successfully crack it, its going to be the NSA which designed it). The worry however is that the NIST suggested elliptical curves that the NSA has known to have backdoors to for the RNGs that generate public keys. Regardless if the NSA really did have a hand in the actual creation of Bitcoin or not (which is debateable), there should at least be some red flags going up that the NSA designed some of its key elements. Whenever mentioned Bitcoiners shrug this off as if this is of no consequence in the world. This is what I mean when I refer to lack of any objectivity within your circle. You can't conceive of any possibility that puts your beloved tech in any sort of bad light because you are emotionally and financially invested.

>>551429
Well bitcoin does have problems, the chain has been forked several times and just last year I remember all the devs on meltdown and many of them had to code overnight and rush out a patch which was very tense.

An example of one of the problems is the 1mb block size limit, other altcoins solve this by increasing it but that just adds further problems and pushes the problem back for a future date. We still don't have a solution to this which doesn't involve a hard fork and seriously messing with a lot of things other things, but the devs and miners are working on it.

Bitcoin isn't just some finished code which we all blindly use. It is open, it is being updated, and it is being patched and the problems are slowly but steadily being addressed.

I'd rather the devs knew what they were doing and were being peer reviewed like they are rather then shitting out patches to add in new features which haven't been duely tested and debugged.

And I don't trust the NSA. I trust the fact that:
a) the algorithm is open
b) the constants are sequential prime cuberoots rather than "random"
c) the entire world community hasn't found a flaw.

And with SHA256 specifically, I might be wrong but isn't it the same algorithm that many (all?) of the big banks use?

If there is a back door and the NSA have some secret code to unravel the hashes then we have a shit-load more problems then just the blockchain being unraveled.

>>551441
To be fair it really isn't the SHA256 which people think might be compromised. It is the elliptical curves used with the RNG for the public keys. The NSA has been known to have instituted backdoors to these in the past and the NIST has been pushing their implementation. This doesn't constitute a smoking gun but should really raise some eyebrows and have people questioning the security of the protocol.

>>551458
With a few billion up for grabs many (probably most) hackers, cryptographers, security analysts and code junkies around the world have had a bash from pretty much any angle you can think of, and they've all ended empty handed.

I'm not trying to say it's infallible, because anything in crypto (by very nature) isn't.

I found this quote quite informative-

"You can never definitively prove a cryptographic system is secure. The only way to "know" a cipher is secure is to make it publicly available and let the best in the world take a crack at it. It is very easy to write a cryptographic system that you yourself can't break but that is next to useless. Secret cryptography usually is weak cryptography. History is littered with examples of failed "strong" systems. One classic one is WEP which is so unbelievably broken it is hard to believe cryptographers came up with it. Security through obscurity doesn't work. Had the specs for WEP been made publicly available in the design phase people would have found the flaws in a matter of weeks and saved everyone a ton of problems down the road. For every good cipher there are dozens and dozens of flawed ones. No matter how smart a single developer is the combined intellect of the planet is better, that is the entire rationale for open source. The NSA is not only responsible for finding the secrets of others they are responsible for ensuring others don't find the secrets of the United States."

>>551473
>With a few billion up for grabs many (probably most) hackers, cryptographers, security analysts and code junkies around the world have had a bash from pretty much any angle you can think of, and they've all ended empty handed
Again I don't think SHA-256 is compromised. The probability of a super quantum computer existing capable of performing a collision attack on SHA-256 hash functions is fairly low at this time (although if one did exist it would be the NSA that had it).

The more likely scenario is that the NSA has backdoors to the RNG. If they do, however, I don't think they would have any incentive to steal Bitcoins but just to monitor Bitcoin users activity like they do with everything else.

>>551491
Well yeah maybe they do,

good thing I don't live in the land of the free

:^)

>>551126
>You don't need to trust a third party, you don't need to trust -anybody- with your own 'money'.
>>551172
>But apple pay and things like it don't, and can't, solve all of problems that bitcoin does.
>Apple... an already fading company.
>>551183
>Besides, I don't want one company to have a monopoly on our finances
>...since we dropped the gold standard...

Libertarians, everyone!
Their heads lodged firmly up their own assholes; too deeply for anyone to pull them back out.

>>549127
Just your daily reminder that I was right and people who invest in crypto-currencies are stupid. Say goodbye to Huobi and HitBTC.

BTC will be $1000 by New Year.

>>552192
True.

>>552192
>>552485
The scary thing is that some people actually still believe this despite everything that's happened.

>>552170

>people who invest in crypto-currencies are stupid

See you at 500 bil market cap faggot. People that invest short in crypto are stupid.

>mfw he thinks posting pictures of anime sluts makes him more credible

>>552505
>invest short
>short
>invest

>>552505
>calling girls sluts
>2014
lol

>>552505
Have fun.
>mfw