/biz/ - Business & Finance

Do you think the alt coins will take over like etheruem?

>>860443

In the future an altcoin should supersede Bitcoin

Not Ethereum

Any Altcoin is ok to this guy as long as it doesn't get popular.

But yes, you're right Ethereum does appear to be taking over.

Polite sage because this threads been posted 8 times already

>>860486

>Any Altcoin is ok to this guy as long as it doesn't get popular.

No, I daresay all the cryptocurrencies that exist right now operate as pyramid schemes and are therefore fraudulent (illegal) and inadvisable 'investments'.

>But yes, you're right Ethereum does appear to be taking over.

No one is really talking about it, not even within Bitcoin circles. The hot topic right now is 'Bitcoin' vs. the Bitcoin XT hard fork.

The price of ETH has dropped from $3.50 just before the release (in the form of 'Ethercoin') to $1.55 as of now.

It seems to be a rehash of 'BitShares', which was a failure.

This guy is a fukin hypocrite.

>>860439

Fuck off Mohammed

>>860452
Which ones do you think?

oh look it's the ETH pump&dump guy again.

No matter how many threads you make anon, ETH isn't going back to the price where you bought it.

>bought $100 doge at almost peak value because it seemed funny
>my doge wallet is now worth $14 as opposed to $12 couple months ago
>to the moon

>>860991

>oh look it's the ETH pump&dump guy again.

But I think ETH is shit, as explained 3 posts up from yours

lrn2read

>>860861

>This guy is a fukin hypocrite.

strong counter-argument/10

Where's the hypocrisy?

>>860987

How can I name an altcoin that doesn't exist yet?

I said it once I'll say it again:

Can I buy/sell black tar fucking heroin with etherium?

>>861511
Hypocrisy is that you own more shit coins than 90% of the people here.

Don't buy cryptocurrencies goys, the FED is your friend. - OP

I'm a newbie, I know some about bitcoin but I've never heard of Ether. Can someone explain if its good or not?

>>862528
It is great go buy some and then gargle on mayonaisse u fuck!

Why do I keep seeing people around the net claiming that Bitcoin will shoot up to thousands of dollars per coin?
Because 3 times this year it's gone up over 300, then immediately plunged back down to the low 200's.

Bitcoin CEO's arrest leaves trail of unanswered questions

https://archive.is/ihqKt

Bitcoiners (pretty much interchangeable with 'Redditors' at this point) are starting to wake up to what anyone with half a brain realized years ago

>>862556
Because it's reaching the point soon where bitcoin won't be worth it to mine (ie costs more electricity than the value of bitcoin).

Bitcoin with either die, or go up in value as miners drop out.

>>862979
Because the extreme minority who -do- check out the code would raise a huge fuss if there was something shady in there.

>>862972
>Bitcoin CEO

kek

Go to bed son

https://twitter.com/aantonop/status/634429803786018816

It's possible to trade bitcoin instantly? Like we do on hyper liquid markets such as stocks and futures?
Is there a leveraged market, like Forex or e-minis?

>>863026
Yes Bitcoin markets never stop trading it's 24/7.

Ethereum is the most exciting technological innovation to come out of blockchain technology. You will see a lot of apps come out on ethereum because they make it easy for developers.

>>863040
Is not the same base code for all crypto-currencies?

I mean, Bitcoin is widely regarded as safe, but what about other cryptocurrencies like Eth? Could the developers have made it rigged?

>>862972
>Bitcoin CEO
wow just wow
Good one Yahoo News.

>>863043
What do you mean by made it rigged?

Ethereum has a turing complete scripting language that lets you create autonomous trustless organisations on the blockchain. So, for example you could have an entire company administrated via code instead of relying on CEO's and shit like that.

The best thing about it is the code is open source and anyone could check to see how it's working.

Even in these early stages people have made autonomous Ponzi schemes and autonomous gambling apps.
There's also a distributed prediction market called auger which is in the crowdfunding stage which would let the Ethereum network be able to "know" real world events. Other DAPPS could call from augers api to find out what's going on in the human world. Exciting times.

>>863053
So, for example you have a DAO that will pay out to each members address in case of some event. Say war breaking out or stock market going to X level. The DAO would use incorruptible information from auger to make that "decision". Basically cutting out all the middlemen.

>>863053
so when does augur launch and when does ethereum hit like 30$ plus?

I can't believe how little talk there is about Auger here on what was supposed to be a crypto containment board. I was going to make a thread last night about the crowdsale bonus ending but needed to go to bed.

sale.augur.net
for those who are interested there's a 10% bonus for the next few days

>>863129
It shouldnt. Ethereum is utilitarian , one hopes that the cost remains somewhere near difficulty to mune for its lifetime.

This ones not a pump and dump coin

>>860439
Mohammed pls go


That said, the network's limited ability to process transactions is quite a big and fundamental issue. And so is blockchain bloat.

The rest of the statements in the OP are either fallacious or outright wrong.

>>863188
Peter Thiel co-founded PayPal with Max Levchin and Elon Musk (seePayPal Mafia) and served as its CEO. He also co-founded Palantir, of which he is chairman. He was the first outside investor in Facebook, the popular social-networking site, with a 10.2% stake acquired in 2004 for $500,000, and sits on the company's board of directors.

Thiel serves as president of Clarium Capital, a global macro hedge fund with $700 million in assets under management; a managing partner in Founders Fund, a venture capital fund with $2 billion in assets under management; co-founder and investment committee chair of Mithril Capital Management; and co-founder and chairman of Valar Ventures.

>>863193

>You're wrong because I say so

Strong counter-argument/10

Also, lol@ all the Ethereum bagholders posting in this thread telling others 'Buy now! Look, this big name dude invested in it! He's smart bro! WHOA!'

Meanwhile the price is currently at $1.33, down from $3.50 on the eve of it's release.

Since world economies are tanking is bitcoin a buy now?

>>864557
I think itll drop lower, no matter what op says tbh there is a lot of things riding on bitcoin and developing around it.

Also if it gets forked another crypto will change its place.

Ill provide links, Nope im not. Because =W=

>>864580
It's been forked in the past and has survived.

>>864580
>no matter what op says tbh there is a lot of things riding on bitcoin and developing around it.

Like what bro?

>>864557
uhh I'm pretty sure Bitcoin is tanking along with them.

>>864774
And remember! The majority of these Bitcoin miners are in China. And most Bitcoin transactions are by the Chinese.
http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/volumepie/

If there is going to be a "happening" in September, it's going to make or break Bitcoin.

>>864445
Price is actually up. $0.30 at ICO. Currently $1.30.

If you think the price will stay this low for long you must be retarded.

>>864779
it's gonna struggle for a while to get past 700k satos. getting back to the release price will take forever, everyone is just waiting to dump.
>tfw bought last at 420k, thanks for the BTC

>>864779

>Price is actually up. $0.30 at ICO. Currently $1.30.

Thanks for saving me the time in presenting my second argument as to why everyone should stay away from Ethereum unless they want to get their money taken from them.

>If you think the price will stay this low for long you must be retarded.

If you think the miners, who are currently getting ETH for ~$0.15 a piece, aren't going to continue dumping until it gets down to that equilibrium price, then you are either ignorant or deluded.

all the people who hate near-relentlessly on bitcoin, do you not still make money from altcoins? even if you hate them, which i don't for a single fucking second agree that you should, why aren't you just doing this at least as a hobby to make a few btc? if you really are so certain that btc is fucked (which to me is frankly comical, blockchain tech IS going to be huge and btc as it's pioneer, will be remembered for that even if the current price is a bit silly)
why are some people so utterly determined to have nothing to do with it? did you lose out early on, or what? it's so easy to profit if you do your research, and even just learning about this stuff i think will be very valuable in coming years. there's still a very real chance imo that crazy btc prices will be seen not too long from now. i'm never gonna quit this shit until the moment blockchain tech is rekt by quantum computers or some other hack, which atm still seems impossible.

>>864807
Lol ok.

I think regardless of how the markets react in the short-term the story will be told by how the ecosystem of Dapps develops. If there is a rich variety of Dapps, and Dapps that leverage other Dapps, and network effects that encourage people to start using Dapps because other people already are, current prices will look cheap.

Ethereum is unique among the cryptos I know of for having the property that its value can increase based on its intrinsic usefulness - a distributed, transparent computer that anyone can pay to use. Other cryptos have use cases where they are better at performing some real-world task than traditional methods (e.g., moving money quickly at low cost) but they don't offer a fundamentally new paradigm.

who wouldn't be attracted to this volatility?
i cash out near-all of my profits immediately, hence this chart not changing much. but see that spike in july? that shit is not uncommon for altcoins and it's all now either in my bank or spent. i started with a gpu, three litecoins and some altdust. i think you're fucking nuts if you're not in on this shit at all. i think everyone, even the most devoted hater, should have at least something stashed just incase. doesn't make me a fortune often, but it's still real money. won't bother with recommendations because i'll just be called shill.
why is there so fucking much hate? there are no valid reasons itt for anyone to be so certain that it's all doomed. blockchain tech is rock fucking solid even if the devs are being a bunch of fairies.

>>864822

>Dapps
>Dapps
>Dapps
>Dapps
>Dapps

These buzzwords are all style, no substance

>Ethereum is unique among the cryptos I know of for having the property that its value can increase based on its intrinsic usefulness

Ethereum does not produce value; the only money you get out of it, comes from the pockets of other people.

>a distributed, transparent computer that anyone can pay to use

Yawn. Nobody is interested. Look at Bitshares, which tried 'smart contracts' and failed.

>>864820
>>864856

>why is there so fucking much hate?

Damn.. I wish I could be rich like you bro..

Oh wait, there's no such thing as free money. You're only stealing money from other fools like yourself who 'invested'.

Well I'm sorry, but I don't believe I'm by sheer luck going to be the one who fleeces the other 100. Especially since the pyramid scheme is heavily skewed in favor of the existing 'early adopters' who hold the bulk of the coins and can't wait to dump.

Reality check: You only get out what you put in. Anyone who promises you more, is looking for more for themselves, and that means they want to con you out of your money so you end up with nothing.

You want to know why people hate it? I hate it because it's fraudulent. Bitcoin, and the rest of these shitcoins, are dens of thieves. But it won't be me who'll be your undoing; your own fellow shitcoiners will fleece you and tell you to be thankful for it.

Also, proof or GTFO bagholder shill.

>>865315
>You're only stealing money from other fools like yourself
get used to it.
>You only get out what you put in
you fucking wish.
>You want to know why people hate it? I hate it because it's fraudulent.
welcome to the real world.

are you ready to make some money yet?

>proof
you tell me how. cryptos hate that kinda stuff.

why is this so hard to believe? so man assert that near-everyone is making losses, where do you think that money is going?

>>865315
I can't believe one man could be so salty. Your criticisms are facile. Cryptocurrencies are an entire ecosystem sure there are scammers and thieves, but there are also good companies and real technological breakthroughs. The world is shades of grey not black and white.

>>865308
You're just salty as fuck.

>buzzwords

Yes. And what? Is it a universally bad thing?

I think you'll be proved wrong.

>>865327
>>865333
>>865340

>get used to it.
>you fucking wish.
>welcome to the real world.
>are you ready to make some money yet?
>I can't believe one man could be so salty.
>Your criticisms are facile.
>You're just salty as fuck.
>I think you'll be proved wrong.

These are the best arguments in favor of Bitcoin their adherents can proffer ladies and gentlemen.

Contrast these 'arguments', if you can call them that, to the detailed arguments I lay out in my articles posted at the top of the thread, which actually are 'backed by math'.

Funny how no one talks about BitShares anymore..

>>864820
What is blockchain tech? I'm new to this, what is the most secure, best wallet to buy Bitcoin with?

so, Bitcoin briefly dipped down to $200 on btce a few hours ago.
Fucking lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ynx26LJ1YC4

Here's whats going on:

>>866756
>>866779

>>862972
>Bitcoin CEO
This is your average FUDsters. For actual facts on the current situation go here:

>>866756 →
>>866779 →

>>862972

For someone against Bitcoin you sure know alot about it. LOL

>>865827
OP is salty as fuck. Here's a good video of someone that knows what he's talking about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0mykANOMGQ

>>866854
Not one for nuanced thinking, are we?

>>866856

This dude saw the error of his ways:

http://webm.land/w/U4u8/

>>866394
>>866255

This is only a brief correction.

HODL.

>>866797
>>866803

Let's address your arguments shill:

>and it cannot be repeated again because the perfect circumstances cannot be repeated again

Wrong. Bitcoin can be copy/pasted as a new altcoin - and with enhanced features that make the altcoin a more attractive alternative.

>the network is way too strong to be attacked no matter how much power you have

Funny, here's what I seem to recall..

Ghash.io had 51% of the network not too long ago, and took advantage of it to doublespend on Satoshi Dice

A tiny group of 'core' developers have control over what Bitcoin is to become. People like Theymos are enforcing their view of Bitcoin should be on the rest of the community, saying just a few days ago 'If 90% of Bitcoin users find these policies to be intolerable, then I want these 90% of Bitcoin users to leave.' and proceeding to censor all discussion of changes to Bitcoin he doesn't like and banning anyone who dares to challenge his authority on this.

Bitcoin is inseparable from exchanges, as they are the only way into the system for 99% of people, as mining has long been not an option for the typical individual. These exchanges are tied down with 'Know Your Customer' and now 'BitLicence' regulation, which means they can trace you right from the start and because Bitcoin's transaction system is transparent, it is Big Brother's wet dream. Exchanges also open up Bitcoin to fraud, speculative hysteria (it functions as a pyramid scheme), price manipulation (see the 'Willy Report'), greater fees, corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency (beyond that of just the developers, who can't decide on let alone do anything).

>>866803

Cont.

>[tl;dr It's a government conspiracy!] is causing hysteria and creating doubt RIGHT when Bitcoin was going to skyrocket again as it always does when something goes to shit fiat related (the Cyprus pump, the Greece pump, etc).

I advise anyone inclined to believe this myth to go back and check the precise dates. You'll find that it coincides precisely with the dates given in the 'Willy Report', which is an analysis of what is evidently insider trading on MtGox, NOT with the problems in Cyprus, Greece or China. For those unfamiliar, the 'Willy Report' shows clearly that Mark Karpeles used nearly HALF A BILLION DOLLARS of non-existent funds (numbers typed into a computer) to buy up Bitcoin on the open market on his exchange, MtGox. This is what caused the two big bubbles in 2013, and probably the 2011 bubble as well.

You only have to look at Neo&Bee, which attracted a measly 2 dozen customers in it's short-lived existence after putting national ads on televised football matches and building a great big new lavish building, to see that no one in Cyprus gave a flying fuck about Bitcoin. This is why nothing happened to the price during the more recent Greece event where banks were shutdown until a referendum decision on staying in the Euro was made.

For more on that, I wrote an article about it at the time: https://medium.com/@KawaiiHolocaust1488/grexit-why-it-s-a-sham-and-why-bitcoin-isn-t-going-anywhere-c15353e5eefd

Again, look at the price - at the time of that article, which was at the time these Greeks were supposedly flooding into Bitcoin, the price was at $267. It went up to $316 a few days later on low volume (which again, you can verify yourself), which was most likely a pump n dump on the news, as the price fell off a cliff back down to $280 and has continued to slide since ($205 as I write this).

>>866803

Cont.

>And all the code they are trying to pass with the excuse of the blocksize decrease your privacy is simply disgusting.
>everyone that Gavin and Hearn has bribed to publically support them will become filthy rich, but say goodbye to financial privacy.
>If Core losses, im afraid of the consequences.

It's funny how you say 'Bitcoin is so secure, no one can touch it!', and then proceed to rant about supposed interference from the government bogey-man, and then what is actually true, which is that a handful of core developers and powerful participants (like Theymos) have total control over what Bitcoin is. You make my argument for me.

The price is getting dangerously low for Bitcoin at this point.. It's at ~$210 right now, which is slightly less than the break-even point for bitcoin miners (on average) I estimate in my article:

The Bitcoin Mining Bubble: Why Bitcoin’s low price is an existential threat
https://archive.is/77l3J

If this price is sustained, perhaps a bit lower than this (i.e. under $200), then I would expect to see a sizable proportion of the hash rate to disappear. The price would have to be sustained for at least a few days to see any effect.

>>866944

I was wondering where the mining costs were.
To be honest I expected that to be near 300$ at least at this point.

And it's not like there's anything here that can actually cause and sustain any kind of climb, so it's pretty safe to say that the whole thing is fucked.
Give it couple of weeks and the small time miners who don't have that much invested are going to stop mining.
Two months sustained losses and Ebay is going to be absolutely full of used GPUs for sale from the bigger miners.
Too bad that they're kinda fucked after being fried 24/7 for mining purposes.

>>866968

>To be honest I expected that to be near 300$ at least at this point.

Some of them have a $300/BTC brek-even point. That was the break-even point from memory of ghash.io/cex.io, who consequently ceased their cloud mining services a while back.

The most efficient (and probably biggest) mining operation outfit I know of is the one in China with Antminer S4/S5 machines and privileged access to $0.03/kWh hydro power - their break even is about $40/BTC. But their total is hash rate share of the network is surprisingly quite low; a lot lower than you might think.

My estimate assumes that most miners are using hardware that is 6-12 months old, on modest electricity rates ($0.10/kWh)

>Two months sustained losses and Ebay is going to be absolutely full of used GPUs for sale from the bigger miners.

They're ASICs, not GPUs. Unlike GPUs, these ASICs are useless outside of Bitcoin (specifically SHA-256) mining. They can't even use them on most altcoins, because altcoins use better more modern methods like Scrypt or more recently X11

10 minutes of silence please for those who fell for the Ethereum meme

>Bitcoins value drops 25% in just 2 1/2 weeks
>"FUTURE OF CURRENCY!"

>>866930
>This is why nothing happened to the price during the more recent Greece event where banks were shutdown until a referendum decision on staying in the Euro was made.

This too infinity, it was literally the nail in the coffin for anyone who was paying any attention at all.

Why wouldnt the price have spiked during the recent greek crisis as it had in the past if not for the fact that the past price spikes were all willybot?

>>866991
except they can use the ethereum for something besides just drugs on the darknet, I agree that a price this high above difficulty (what is it now if we take that into account...a fair price... 0.30 cents a coins or so?) is a shame and the pump to 3 dollars didn't do anyone any favors but its not like the hundreds of other alts that have dropped out of favor and will never be useful again

ethereum isnt a get rich quick scheme and shouldnt be treated as one, im glad early investors got a handsome profit though

>>866911
>http://webm.land/w/U4u8/
LMAO. Confirmed for troll. Do they pay you for this shit or do you do it for shits and giggles?

Anyway replying to a troll post but for the clueless here that may not get it, here's the uncut interview where he is basically saying at first he said "this is just nerd money" because he was clueless, then when he understood the revolution that Bitcoin meant he started researching it all day, when he says it's not a currency, it means it's a platform and can do endless things beyond a currency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snAC4zg23Sc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaHqtXvGxy4

I don't need to waste my time reading the rest of your FUD since this proves you are just here with a disinfo agenda or just plain psychopatic trolling due lossing money on Bitcoin on god knows what. But I have some free time so I'll address your bullshit one last time. (cont)

>>866911
>Wrong. Bitcoin can be copy/pasted as a new altcoin - and with enhanced features that make the altcoin a more attractive alternative.

You don't understand what I just said. Again, your shitcoin altcoin will not go under the radar in a post-Bitcoin environment, everything promising is prone to being attacked now. No other coin will get ignored until reaching a point where attacking it is pointless, like Bitcoin did during the underground period of the first years. You can't repeat what Bitcoin did because cryptocurrencies are now a huge thing.

>Ghash.io had 51% of the network not too long ago, and took advantage of it to doublespend on Satoshi Dice

Again, you don't understand the protocol at all. Ghash.io didn't disrupt the network. The miners do not get to decide anything, its the majority of users who run the nodes, the merchants and the exchanges who ultimately decide which version of the protocol they deem valid, which chain of blocks they value the most.
"51% attack" is a buzzword clueless mongs drop to spread FUD about the protocol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncPyMUfNyVM
More in dept:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

The SatoshiDice doublespends where their fault, not the protocol's fault. There has only been one successful doublespend with confirmations back in 2013, during the Great Fork. Someone managed to make a sizeable transaction and have it revert when the fork resolved itself. A double spend attack was successful, despite that both sides of the chain heard about the transactions in the same order. The reason is most likely that the memory pools were cleared when the mining pool nodes were downgraded. A solution is for nodes to sync their mempools to each other at startup, however, this requires a memory pool expiry policy to be implemented as currently node restarts are the only way for unconfirmed transactions to be evicted from the system. (cont)

>>866930
>A tiny group of 'core' developers have control over what Bitcoin is to become. People like Theymos are enforcing their view of Bitcoin should be on the rest of the community, saying just a few days ago 'If 90% of Bitcoin users find these policies to be intolerable, then I want these 90% of Bitcoin users to leave.' and proceeding to censor all discussion of changes to Bitcoin he doesn't like and banning anyone who dares to challenge his authority on this.

Again, it's a mix o the users running nodes, the merchants and the nodes. The protocol is still robust, Theymos moderating in a way or another is a political issue, not a technological one. No matter what the fuck you do, any coin/protocol will be subjected to this, so this is not "a Bitcoin problem". And in any case, Bitcoin XT is technically an altcoin (and a shitty one with centralization of nodes and an anti privacy agenda, while we are at it), so they should promote it themselves.
People is free to run whatever nodes they want, businessmen are free to support whatever fork they want, merchants are free to support any node they want. From where they get the information of what's going on, they are also free to look around, read and take their own conclusions. This is all political and no technology is safe from that. In any case, all the fork drama is really overblown. Diversity is good and bitcoin is resilient. Consensus will converge on the correct answer.

>>867893

>Bitcoin is inseparable from exchanges, as they are the only way into the system for 99% of people, as mining has long been not an option for the typical individual. These exchanges are tied down with 'Know Your Customer' and now 'BitLicence' regulation, which means they can trace you right from the start and because Bitcoin's transaction system is transparent, it is Big Brother's wet dream. Exchanges also open up Bitcoin to fraud, speculative hysteria (it functions as a pyramid scheme), price manipulation (see the 'Willy Report'), greater fees, corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency (beyond that of just the developers, who can't decide on let alone do anything).

This is an non issue. Localbitcoins is there in case you want to avoid dealing with KyC stuff, and soon decentralized exchanges will be there as well (search Coinffeine, Multisigna... etc). Once decentralized exchanges kick in you'll be free to choose if you want to bypass goverment issued regulations or not. Again, for Bitcoin to success, certain level of regulation is needed, but the good news is there will always be ways around it.
Not to mention if getting paid in Bitcoin becomes a common thing. Im myself getting paid in Bitcoin directly from my programing freelance jobs, writting jobs, etc. I don't use any platform, i get paid directly on my wallet. All of that Bitcoin on my wallet is inmune to any governments, and I can spend it in any BTC accepting merchant without paying any taxes. So in this situation im free to choose if I want to get my Bitcoins taxed or not. Opefully Core wins so we can get a more private-centered Bitcoin, but in any case, due its open source nature, if software like DarkWallet get developed, goverments can say goodbye at tracking any money.

Again, you've proved you are a clueless troll by posting a manipulated video of Andreas Antonopolous which qualifies you as a troll to avoid at all costs.

I love this thread. I think I know who started it. It was the "prove it" guy from /pol/.

Some people got butthurt from all the suddenly hood rich bitcoiners shoving their newfound wealth in their faces. Generated a lot of pent up jealousy in some people. Resulting in OP's like this.

If sour grapes was HIV this niggers got full blown AIDS

>>867864

I like posting that video because Bitcoiners gullible as fuck and easily butthurt

>everything promising is prone to being attacked now.

I haven't even described this future altcoin, so on what basis do you claim to know it will be 'attacked'?

>Ghash.io didn't disrupt the network.
>"51% attack" is a buzzword

The only buzzword here is 'disrupt'. A 51% attack is quite plain to understand: An entity mines 51% of the blocks on the network (could actually be as little as ~40%, '51%' is a bit of a misnomer), and this centralization of the authentication process of transactions means the entity can reverse transactions after sending them (double spending).

Now Ghash.io DID in actual fact double spend against BetCoin Dice (I mistakenly recalled it as Satoshi Dice, which evidently you didn't even check up to verify or know yourself).

>The miners do not get to decide anything, its the majority of users who run the nodes, the merchants and the exchanges who ultimately decide which version of the protocol they deem valid

lol no. Transactions are authenticated by the miners. Nodes simply relay/broadcast the transactions. Merchants and exchanges have no control over the network. You might want to re-read your Prophet Satoshi's holy paper again, as you don't seem to know the basics of how the Bitcoin network functions.

>Localbitcoins is there in case you want to avoid dealing with KyC stuff
>decentralized exchanges

You can't decentralize fiat (it's logically impossible), and if you use LocalBitcoins to flaunt laws you are as dumb as the idiots who use Purse.io to get a 30% discount via stolen credit cards. There have already been several LE sting operations specific to LocalBitcoins, and plenty more who have been caught (as well as defrauded). Oh, and governments are starting to crack down on the site itself too. Pic related.

The rest of your babble is interspersed with concessions of defeat, and it would be going too far I think to kick you while you're down.

>>868054

I made my money on altcoins, mainly Litecoin (mined while it was at ~$0.50, sold at $20-$25). I've talked about this in previous threads.

I cashed out because I knew it was a pyramid scheme, and I never invested in any actual money into it. I already had a gaming GPU, so it was a no-risk situation for me.

Bitcoiners bought into the GET RICH QUICK hype though, and didn't (most still don't) realize it's a pyramid scheme. I suspect the average Bitcoiner has dumped several thousand dollars into Bitcoin.

My arguments against Bitcoin speak for themselves. Bitcoiners on the other hand are forced to continue the 'GET RICH QUICK' slogan, as the price is collapsing - they're making fools of themselves.

>>868085
your butthurt I understand

BTW for anyone who wants to know who this 'Andreas' guy is, and doesn't want to watch his 1 hour shilling videos, here's a summary:

This dude was a consultant to Neo&Bee. When Neo&Bee went bankrupt and the CEO ran off with the remaining backpay for staff wages, Antonopoulos washed his hands of it. Google 'Neo & Bee – A Statement By Andreas M. Antonopoulos' if you want to see more; the fact that he had to release a public statement to quell criticism I put it to you is a concession of both his responsibility and guilt. Of course he never really did admit any guilt, and accused anyone who called him out as being 'trolls'.

Then after that there was Blockchain.info, for whom he served as the 'Chief Security Officer'. Shortly after Antonopoulos left this position, Blockchain.info was hacked.

By now you're starting to get a picture of this guy's character - but what about his ideas? Well, what he says in his lectures isn't anything you can't deduce by yourself. It's basically just a marketing spiel. After all, he presents these speeches to middle aged noobs with the explicit intent of getting them to buy the Bitcoin product.

If I could mention one notable insight by him, I honestly would, but there simply aren't any I can think of. The only two aspects about him that stand out to me are his decent public speaking ability and his wide-eyed stare.

In fact I challenge anyone to describe a single unique insight Andreas has produced, just to show that I'm not misrepresenting the man.

>>868061
Nigga what the fuck is this bullshit? Are you trying to tell me becuase i bought 300$ with in bitcoin the secret service is investigating me? Lol okay. sure. Let them investigate ill investigate back. and we will see who the best investigator is.

>>868156

>Nigga what the fuck is this bullshit? Are you trying to tell me becuase i bought 300$ with in bitcoin the secret service is investigating me?

Obviously they're less likely to go after you for small amounts. It's similar to not declaring purchases or capital gains on precious metals. With small sums of money, they're not going to care.

However they are now going after the site itself, and if you view that image I posted you'll see that the big Bitcoin exchanges are now blacklisting people who use LocalBitcoins.

On a related note, if you bought your Bitcoins from an exchange which required identity verification (pretty much the only option now with LocalBitcoins being shady/overpriced and mining no longer feasible), then you are probably on a list. No evidence for this of course, but consider this: There are only perhaps a million to 2 million people using Bitcoin. Bitcoin is used for CP, Terrorism funding, and selling drugs. Do you really think the government isn't keeping a close eye on anyone who involves themselves with this currency? We already know what the NSA can and have done in terms of just passive surveillance; imagine what they're doing in regards to Bitcoin and it's users.

>>868144
he gives off a crazy kike vibe

>>868179
Bought on coinbase for trading even though it has shitty margins. Real shit though the Secret service would be fucked casue i bought in the EXACT day, the EXACT FUCKING HOUR that it started crashing hard. Never actually used a bitcoin for purchasing any goods or services but i imagine now would be a cheap time to.

>>868179
Oh yeah sidenote ive never used localbitcoins just bought it fresh off the exchange.

It's completely legal to own and use bitcoins.

It is completely illegal to make large amounts of undeclared income.

The NSA is interested in the sale of bitcoins just like they're interested in the sale of antiques or gold. It's their job to look into shit like this.

>>866902

How do you arrest the CEO of Bitcoin if there is no CEO? It just shows how little this guy knows or he's pushing an agenda

>>866991
>literately spent my time coming to /biz/ to warn niggas that it was just a pump and dump.
>got no love because some idiots clearly cant tell a shill when they see it.
>they buy in and gain nothing.

Seriously though if you need to get your trading advice from /biz/ in 2015 you are a failure we don't really do Trading tip threads anymore.

>>868144

>I like posting that video because Bitcoiners gullible as fuck and easily butthurt

Nah you are a pathetic disinfo troll butthurt at missing the boat.

>I haven't even described this future altcoin, so on what basis do you claim to know it will be 'attacked'?

You haven't described it because it doesn't exist. Any decentralized system will be prone to attacks and none will go under the radar like Bitcoin did because decentralization and cryptocurrencies weren't a thing pre-Bitcoin. You seem to keep ignoring this crucial fact.

>The only buzzword here is 'disrupt'. 51% (...)

Already addressed. Again, your nonsense vs researched facts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bi2thGzzNSs

>lol no. Transactions are authenticated by the miners. Nodes (...)

You were talking about who decides "the future of bitcoin" and not who processes transactions. If you can't see the role of nodes, merchants and exchanges to decide if a BIP or a fork happens, you aren't paying enough attention (this is literally happening fucking now). Again, making a fool of yourself as you can't follow your own narrative.

>Localbitcoins is there in case you want to avoid dealing with KyC stuff
>decentralized exchanges

>You can't decentralize fiat (it's logically impossible), and if you use LocalBitcoins.

>The rest of your babble is interspersed with concessions of defeat (...)

Decentralize fiat??, also I like how you ignore the fact I break your shit when I point to Coinffeine (p2p decentralized exchange). Also, again, I get paid in BTC and haven't barely used any fiat for a year now anyway.
>868144
>This guy is too smart, let's drop some vague "guy worked at X" conspiracy theory and point out how he looks like a psychopath, ignoring what he has to say because im unable to address it.

There, 1 hour of raw knowledge on doublespends, go study dummy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSsHEf1IirI

>>868322
This idiot will say he was "trolling" everytime he says something wrong. It's how the clinically butthurt psychopaths cope.

>>868179

>On a related note, if you used the internet from a modem which required identity verification (pretty much the only option now with AOL/Compuserve), then you are probably on a list. No evidence for this of course, but consider this: There are only perhaps a million to 2 million people using the internet. The internet is used for CP, Terrorism funding, and selling drugs. Do you really think the government isn't keeping a close eye on anyone who involves themselves with this technology? We already know what the FUD can and have done in terms of just passive surveillance; imagine what they're doing in regards to the internet and it's users.

Signed, early 90's Internet FUD McFUDster.

>>868322

It says Bitcoin CEO, not CEO of Bitcoin.

If an article says 'Banking CEO arrested' does your autism flare up and you insist 'How can you arrest the CEO of Banking if there is no CEO?'

>You haven't described it because it doesn't exist.

That's exactly what I said. A future altcoin; not an existing one. It's not unthinkable that a future altcoin will be so radically different from Bitcoin that a 51% attack is either dis-incentivized or made impossible.

Your claim is that all future altcoins can be 'attacked', and you still haven't provided reasoning in support of this claim.

>Already addressed. Again, your nonsense vs researched facts:

I'm not watching your stupid shill videos. I know what a 51% attack is, and I've described it. Summarize your argument or GTFO.

>>869170
>>868501

Forgot to link

>You were talking about who decides "the future of bitcoin" and not who processes transactions.

You were talking specifically about a 51% attack. Here's the full quotation from your post:

"Again, you don't understand the protocol at all. Ghash.io didn't disrupt the network. The miners do not get to decide anything, its the majority of users who run the nodes, the merchants and the exchanges who ultimately decide which version of the protocol they deem valid, which chain of blocks they value the most.
"51% attack" is a buzzword clueless mongs drop to spread FUD about the protocol."

I'll repeat: Nodes, merchants and exchanges have no influence over a 51% attack. There is no version of a Bitcoin 'protocol' that can prevent a 51% attack.

As for who decides whether or not to adopt a fork, which is a separate matter, the only party that matters is again the miners. If Bitcoin miners switch to a new fork, then that becomes Bitcoin, because the 'old' Bitcoin is left with no miners. No miners = no network. Because nodes are so cheap to run, there will always be at least a handful, and that combined with the miners gives you a network. Exchanges and merchants have no say in the matter, nor do the Bitcoin holders they might attempt to influence.

As for who *creates* the fork, that is a handful of core developers. Whatever the core developers decide is what Bitcoiners will accept, especially if the extant version of Bitcoin is facing severe existential threats (i.e. 1MB block limit).

>>868501

>Decentralize fiat??, also I like how you ignore the fact I break your shit when I point to Coinffeine (p2p decentralized exchange).

In order to have a 'decentralized' exchange you must be able to somehow 'decentralize' fiat. Otherwise how will you exchange fiat for Bitcoin on this 'decentralized' exchange? It is logically impossible to think of fiat as being decentralized.

I tried Coinffeine a month ago, which is when I think it was first publicly released (see pic). From memory, it's just tried the same thing as Bitshares attempted - it's not actually a 'decentralized' fiat exchange, but a token exchange. You might be able to technically call the exchange 'decentralized', but it doesn't actually solve the root issue. The fiat side of the equation is done via a payment processor, NOT by the 'decentralized exchange' Coinffeine.

>There, 1 hour of raw knowledge on doublespends, go study dummy:

I have to say again, I'm not going to waste my time watching your shill videos for some tidbit of information that may or may not be present. Instead of leading me and others on a wild goose chase, summarize what you have learned from the video. Tell me one thing Antonopoulos supposedly said in that video that is a unique insight made by him.

>>868501

>let's drop some vague "guy worked at X" conspiracy theory

Dude, it's not a conspiracy theory if the guy actually released his own personal statement on his involvement. Anyone can google it as I said; the title of his statement on his Neo&Bee involvement is 'Neo & Bee – A Statement By Andreas M. Antonopoulos – A consultant’s perspective'. This is posted on his own personal website.

The Blockchain.info hack, as well as Antonopoulos' position as Chief Security Officer, is also public knowledge. Again, you can google both of those.

>ignoring what he has to say because im unable to address it.

I have already addressed everything he has said. I've torn Bitcoin in apart in several articles at the top of this thread. If there's anything he's said that I haven't addressed, then state specifically what it is; not just posting another 3 hour video in response to having your counter-argument destroyed.

>>869196

Forgot to include pic

What price level will this apocalypse happen?

How cheap does Bitcoin have to be to implode?

>>869339

A price under $200 sustained for a week

The most efficient operation in the world seems to have a $40/BTC break-even, but this is far and away from the average.

OP has already been schooled and exposed as a manipulator of facts. Why does he persist in wasting time?

>>869170
>That's exactly what I said. A future altcoin; not an existing one. It's not unthinkable that a future altcoin will be so radically different from Bitcoin that a 51% attack is either dis-incentivized or made impossible.

51% attacks on Bitcoin are already dis-incentivized you dumb fuck. Read the whitepaper. An attack gains more by being a good actor than a bad actor after spending that much of hashing power.

>I'm not watching your stupid shill videos. I know what a 51% attack is, and I've described it. Summarize your argument or GTFO.

>Im avoid facts.
Is this how you cope?

>As for who decides whether or not to adopt a fork, (...)

Again you fail understand how exchanges, merchants, payment processors and big business play a huge role in influencing where things go. You aren't paying attention to what's going on. Again Bitcoin has a huge political side that you are ignoring.

>Because nodes are so cheap to run,

For NOW. Not if Bitcoin XT wins, because the huge blocksize will make it impossible for individuals to run their own full nodes. Again, this is politics, they have an agenda to centralize Bitcoin, Hearncoin is objectively evil. You can't grasp this.

>As for who *creates* the fork, that is a handful of core developers. Whatever the core developers decide is what Bitcoiners will accept, especially if the extant version of Bitcoin is facing severe existential threats (i.e. 1MB block limit).

It's open source, anyone is free to code and propose BIPs and those BIPs will get voted, there are TONS of BIPs that have been accepted and they were coded by "no names". If there is no consensus amongs debts anyone is free to fork and promote their own shitcoin like Hearncoin and try to convince people into making it the official Bitcoin deprecating the other one. If you convince merchants, exchanges, etc, you have a huge card to play with. Again, politics.

>>869196
>I have to say again, I'm not going to waste my time watching your shill videos for some tidbit of information that may or may not be present. Instead of leading me and others on a wild goose chase, summarize what you have learned from the video. Tell me one thing Antonopoulos supposedly said in that video that is a unique insight made by him.

>Shill videos
You keep saying that word but I don't think it means what you think it means. You choose to ignore a person with superior knowledge on Bitcoin because he worked in X and has "psychopathic eyes" (inb4 I don't have 15 minutes to watch a video -the other one was 15 minutes- while wasting a lot more time here). In general you will ignore any video I post because there is people more skilled and knowledgeable on Bitcoin than you are and it would take you huge effort to address every researched, objective fact in a way that sounds as if you are right and correcting them. Learning about Bitcoin takes hard work, let alone trying to prove knowledgeable people wrong. Im not going to summarize shit for you, go study from the source or GTFO.

>fiat
Again, I get paid in BTC. I've barely bought any BTC and when I bought it I meet with a guy I know is legit IRL. Eventually getting paid in BTC will be more and more common so you don't have to deal with the bullshit. If you use a decentralized exchange like coinffeine or something like Multisigna and get a bank account in switzerland you are pretty much safe. But again, ideally you want to get paid in Bitcoin if you want the highest levels of privacy.

>I have already addressed everything he has said. I've torn Bitcoin in apart in several articles at the top of this thread. If there's anything he's said that I haven't addressed, then state specifically what it is; not just posting another 3 hour video in response to having your counter-argument destroyed.

You haven't done shit and you know it. Again, coping.

>>869445

>51% attacks on Bitcoin are already dis-incentivized you dumb fuck

And yet Ghash.io used their 51% majority to double spend against BetCoin Dice

#RektByReality

>Again you fail understand how exchanges, merchants, payment processors and big business play a huge role in influencing where things go. You aren't paying attention to what's going on. Again Bitcoin has a huge political side that you are ignoring.

There's no substance here to address. Everything you're saying is just 'You don't understand; I do, because I am enlightened by my own intelligence'.

I've already explained that nodes/companies/end users don't matter because if the miners switch to a fork, these nodes/companies/end users will be forced to accept it. What motivates these miners is not 'politics' but money. One monetary incentive for going with Bitcoin XT for example would be that if Bitcoin is restricted to 1MB blocks then it can't grow, as the network would become virtually usable if it did, and 'growth' here translates to more people pouring money into the system so miners can cash it out.

>For NOW. Not if Bitcoin XT wins, because the huge blocksize will make it impossible for individuals to run their own full nodes

I agree with you that Bitcoin's growing bandwidth consumption is unsustainable, which I explain in the following article:

Block size vs. Transaction Fees: The Achilles heel of Bitcoin explained for the layman
https://archive.is/tryCG

Bitcoin cannot scale and will inevitably collapse, either due to restricting transactions/introducing ridiculous fees and therefore preventing use/uptake of the network (which kills miners and therefore the network), or due to overburdening of nodes (which kills nodes and therefore the network). Whichever way the developers go - Bitcoin XT's 8MB blocks or the current 1MB blocks, or something inbetween - Bitcoin is fucked.

>there are TONS of BIPs that have been accepted

Accepted by who? Wait, don't answer that.. rhetorical question.

>>869451

>You choose to ignore a person with superior knowledge on Bitcoin

I'm still waiting for you to describe something Antonopoulos has said is a unique insight, or is at least something I don't know.

>Learning about Bitcoin takes hard work

Nah, it only takes an hour or two to get the jist of it.

>go study from the source

I've watched quite a few of his videos actually. How do you think I made that clip you got butthurt about after all? I've found nothing he has said uniquely insightful. I've listened to the arguments made by Bitcoiners for years, having been an observer since late 2010 and having done altcoin mining myself (I probably know Bitcoin better than almost any Bitcoiner!) - with this knowledge I have written a few articles addressing some of the key arguments and problems with Bitcoin, which you can read for yourself in the OP.

>>869451

BTW I was rereading your posts, and I just realized how often you use phrases lifted straight from Antonopoulos' speeches, like 'go study from the source'.

Andreas, pls go.

I think you missed the boat. Got butthurt. Started mining Altcoins that went nowhere and got butthurt even more. This thread is the story of one mans butthurt nothing more.

>Invest in something that doesn't exist
>Be suprised the value is all over the place but generally sinking

>>869569
Lol how's your share portfolio looking? Hope it goes ok for you lol

>>869599

>tfw I hold pretty much 100% cash

The dollar is king right now

Stocks, commodities, shitcoins - they're all declining against the dollar

So much for all those Zerohedge articles in 2011 yelling 'AMERICA IS ON THE BRINK OF COLLAPSE!!! GREECE WILL DEFAULT AND DESTROY THE ANGLOSPHERE! BOW DOWN TO YOUR NEW MASTERS, CHINA AND RUSSIA!'

..4 years later Russia is getting rekt by ramped up oil production (USA is now once again the largest oil producer in the world!) which has bought down oil prices by 70%. China is destroying itself from within due to housing and stock bubbles, as well as being royally fucked in the ass by the US of A who have ramped up domestic manufacturing and have killed (even reversed!) rising commodity prices. Greece has remained under control, as with Tsipras recently getting served a shit deal he had no choice but to take. All the hysteria we heard in 2011 of hyperinflation due to the FED's QE has now all been quietly forgotten, with there actually being slight deflation and an economy that is getting back on the backs of other countries like the good ol' days.

>>869880

Nocoiners actually believe this.

>>869880
America isn't gonna collapse, not once I inherit my ranch and marry some Mormon breeders that will give me 300 daughters for my /int/ brothers

we're slowly getting back on course to the moon

>>869483
Go study from the source sounds like what any rational being would say.

>>869467
>There's no substance (...)

You don't understand it because you are wrong and refuse to learn from more knowledgeable people. Go on reddit where you can talk to the developers themselves and measure your own knowledge agaisnt them.

>Bitcoin can't grow unless XT

Are you this retarded. No one is supporting XT, XT is already dead. Blockstream, sidechains and a reasonable blocksize increase BIP will win. Bitcoin will scale worldwide just like TCP/IP it, while users can still run decentralized full nodes. Deal or cope more.

>TCP/IP cannot scale and will inevitably collapse

Again, you sound like the guys that tried to be know it alls about the internet saying how TCP/IP was fucked and would never do voip or scale worldwide, or how Ipv4 is fucked since 1992.
You are trying to be smarter than geniuses like Greg Maxwell. Don't you see how dumb you look like. Get some perspective.

>Accepted by who? Wait, don't answer that.. rhetorical question.

Accepted by experts who have demonstrated that they want the best for Bitcoin and then backed up by miners, nodes etc by accepting blocks under said BIPs. What the fuck did you expect, AI? We need filters. We obviously need good actors, and even then, no one stoped Gavin and Hearn from leaving and doing their own soft fork and trying to get their own code becoming the official code, too bad their trojan horse scam is now known by everyone and XT is doomed.

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/21699/major-mining-pools-make-stand-bitcoin-xt-fork-support-bip-100-grows/

>Andreas, pls go.

Just lol at you. "Go study from the source" sounds like something anyone reasoanble would say, I don't know what the fuck did he say. You can go on reddit and argue with Greg Maxwell, Andreas, Peter.. themselves, but you will probably commit suicide when you get schooled in every angle, thats why you will stay shitposting on /biz/ like the low IQ troll you are.

>>870504
>You don't understand it because you are wrong and refuse to learn from more knowledgeable people.

We get it, you are enlightened by your intelligence - but you're not convincing anyone to buy Bitcoins by repeatedly saying this. You just look like you have no arguments in favor of Bitcoin that have not already been thoroughly refuted.

>Go on reddit where you can talk to the developers themselves and measure your own knowledge agaisnt them.
>You can go on reddit

How about you switch back to the plebbit tab shitwit

At least we know now where you're coming from

>No one is supporting XT, XT is already dead.

I think you're in for a rude shock my friend. The 1MB limit has already been hit, and Bitcoin as is just won't do. I personally don't give a shit about whether Bitcoin XT is accepted or not, as Bitcoin is fucked whether it increases block sizes or not:

Block size vs. Transaction Fees: The Achilles heel of Bitcoin explained for the layman
https://archive.is/tryCG

>>870504

>argue with Greg Maxwell, Andreas, Peter

Criticism of Bitcoin is censored by Theymos and his goons on /r/Bitcoin and Bitcointalk. Even just saying you support Bitcoin XT is an insta-ban offense - even many die-hard Bitcoiners are getting caught, as you can read about in /r/bitcoin_uncensored. It's so bad now that even some of the /r/Bitcoin moderators are starting to squirm. Google 'Confessions of an /r/bitcoin moderator'; in it John Ratcliff (/u/jratcliff63367) says the following:

>FROM MODERATORS TO CENSORS
>The owner of /r/bitcoin decided that any discussion of the proposed bitcoin fork known as ‘bitcoin-xt’ would not be allowed

>He made the decision, he informed the moderator team of it, and then acted upon it. It was not some deep dark secret. He made it very clear, and very public. So, all of that is the good news. The bad news, is that his decision was wrong in every way imaginable.

>When /u/theymos decided to use his centralized authority of /r/bitcoin to stifle all debate and discussion of bitcoin-xt, he violated a core principle. As a decentralized peer-to-peer network, any point of centralized control is problematic.

>This one single person holds absolute centralized control of the two largest communications platforms for the community to discuss the future and evolution of bitcoin.

>He exercises absolute power of what is, or is not, allowed to be discussed; including complete and total censorship power over the narrative in the two largest media outlets.

>For whatever reason /u/theymos is profoundly against bitcoin-xt, or any increase in blocksize in general. This is his opinion. And, there are probably some valid arguments to be made on this point. The problem is, rather than sharing his opinion and engaging in the debate, he has shut down all debate by censoring the top two forums where the bitcoin community discusses these topics.

>>870504

As for Andreas, he won't reply to any criticism, calling them 'trolls' and then blocking them. Bitcoiners have sealed themselves off in a world of their own, in a vain attempt to protect themselves. It's a cult. They're only hurting themselves, as no one is being convinced by this to buy Bitcoins (as reflected by the declining price), and because they refuse to listen to anything 'negative' they're losing their money as Bitcoin walks the path towards an inevitable self-destruction.

>run decentralized full nodes.

lol wat.

Do you even know what a node is? You can't 'decentralize' a node. It's just a computer server dumbass.

>you sound like the guys that tried to be know it alls about the internet saying how TCP/IP was fucked and would never do voip or scale worldwide, or how Ipv4 is fucked since 1992.

Source? No one said this. The internet was taken seriously from the very beginning.

Bitcoin is comparable to Flooz, not the internet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s7V9I7LVp4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flooz.com

>Accepted by experts

And who are said experts?

Drum roll maestro please..

The exclusive inner circle known as the 'core developers'.

oh shit, ETH is being integrated into UNITY/SuperNET

https://twitter.com/EtherCoins/status/635865853146349568

>>870963
sell orders cancelled, btw. they were all above 700k at this point 'cause i'm willing to wait, but this news isn't trivial, so i'm now holding until i get a better idea of how valuable ETH will eventually prove to be.

>>870978

$1.14 and falling.

ETH has fallen by 70% since release

No one gives a flying fuck about 'SuperNET'

>Bitcoiners tasked with building a website

Why trust them with your money, when they can't even into PNG-8 background images?

Node bandwidth usage is even worse than I suspected it to be.

I knew that it would be more than the conservative estimates I posit in my articles, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Nearly 1 terabyte in a month, and that's right now with just 1MB blocks!

Can you imagine what that will be with larger blocks (which are inevitable if Bitcoin is to actually grow) - to match the size of VISA, blocks would have to be half a gigabyte in size; imagine the overall bandwidth burden of that on nodes!

Remember folks, there is no financial incentive to run nodes. You don't make any money from it. If I tried to use 781GB each month here, I'd likely get booted from my ISP for violating 'Acceptable Use'.

Nodes will end up turning off as the bandwidth costs/usage gets beyond that of residential availability.

No nodes = no network

Bitcoiners are getting blown the fuck out by Bitcoin's own core developers

>>871049

BTW, Roger Ver says he paid $100K for that website redesign

If true, he's either laundering money or he's just a typical Bitcoiner (gullible as fuck and easily parted from their money)

>>872322
aren't you a bit embarrassed to be this angry?
bitcoin isn't gonna go away, better just get used to it.

>>872335

>bitcoin isn't gonna go away

Oh but it is my friend

See that steadily declining price? Once it hits the double digits (or perhaps anything under $200 for a week), mining will become irrational and the machines will be turned off and you'll have a dead network that can't recover.

>>872335

I've been doing some fine-tuning of my calculations of the break-even price for the Kangding mine, which is probably the largest and most efficient Bitcoin mining operation in the world with ~20,000 ASIC machines.

In one of my articles, I estimated conservatively $40/BTC as their break-even. But putting in more precise figures (most taken straight from the words of the guy running it), this has gone up to $84/BTC, or $81/BTC excluding labor costs for the 10 employees (there's probably more than 10 now, but I want to remain conservative).

tl;dr If the price falls to less than $100, the Bitcoin network is well and truly finished.

Note: Most miners will not have anywhere near the efficiency of the Kangding operation, so you would expect a majority of miners to turn off their machines and thus kill the network at ~$200 or slightly less.

Here's a typical American residential mining operation.

I picked the KNC Neptune to use as an example, as it was a popular pre-order, and it's fairly new/efficient with a 0.7GH/s per watt efficiency.

As you can see, these small time miners likely won't turn off their machines immediately. Even though the rational choice is turn off at $170/BTC, the loss is only a few cents per day. Thus why I suggest a price of under $200 that must be sustained for at least a week, because a week's worth of losses is sizable. If you could save $1 by turning off your machine, would you? Perhaps not. But once you lose $10 or more? You probably would.

Just for laughs, the break-even price for the crème de la crème of ASIC miners on Australian residential electricity ($0.22/kWh) is $295/BTC

>>872376

Actually, forgot to convert from AUD to USD, so that should be $250/BTC

>>861669

The government and rich own most of bitcoin now.What is it, 18 addresses that own 90% of bitcoin? gl m8

Can't hackers just make bit coins for themselves? I've never understood this bitcoin nonsense

>>860452
>In the future an altcoin should supersede Bitcoin
Is altcoin a fork of bitcoin's code? (like very other non-bitcoin bitcoin)
If yes then it will have the same problem as bitcoin 4 years out when the block chain gets fucking huge.

>>872390
>im a computa
>stop all the downloadan

>>872376
$0.22 per kwh is crazy. I pay $0.06 per kwh in the United States.

>>872403
Australia is crazy. Those crazy niggas are going to inherit the earth.

I think my gay retarded wallet is broken. It's synced but the 2 BTC that should be in my wallet isn't there.

Any bored chumps feel like sending a bitpenny to 17jsALfRrPgBGvAb1b3JdEoQ65EkztDLrA?

>>872403

I pay 0.15 eur per kwh.
In a country where minimum wage is 2.25Eur/hour gross.
It amuses me when I see americucks complain about their lives...

>>860439
jp morgan
chase bank

are banning money

Also denmark is going to stop printing money at the end of this year.

Andreas and the other shills are to promote that banks don't like bitcoin even when its infact the opposite, a global wealth transfer is in effect.

Bitcoin is being used as a trojan horse.

Infact reverse engineering bitcoin can make you track everything easier.

>>872670
All of you are fighting Misinformation vs Disinformation.

Ethreum is looking good tbh

I am only here to spill this information and not keep it to myself because without 4chan my life woulda been garbage.

>>872670
>>872671

>jp morgan chase bank are banning money
>Ethreum is looking good tbh

Put down the pipe.

>>872389
Some of them have owned a huge hunk sonce day one and never moved a single coin, such as the satoshi wallet. Kind of weird , gives prudence to the "bitcoin is a darpa project" idea

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mBc0Zk1YWs

Buy Bitcoin now or keep coping and kill yourself in 10 years due regret.

>>873362
Andreas is an misinformation to say banks and the goverment don't like bitcoin.

Infact they do to the higest level.

Bitcoin is a trojan horse, anonymity is the selling point.

We only have a 1-2 year window when bitcoin is transfers into government coin which can be tracked along with things that use reverse block chain technology I.E. *the internet of things*

>>860439
You are correct on a lot of things OP, but it goes deeper then that and why it works this way.

>>860439
And check Denmark to stop printing cash by the end of this year.

>>873417
Whats wrong with DK

>>860439
>Bitcoin’s
What terrifies me the most is you bring up nothing about the economic recession or collapse.

>>873428
I have no idea, I just got this from a source most of these are not even my words.

I've never bought or had a single bitcoin but I've read this entire thread and correct me if I'm wrong and that's what I got.

Bitcoin is a highly developed scheme.

It was designed with security in mind to make it more complex to find the masterminds behind this.

It can flood the network.

It played with the new trend for sound money to stimulate demand and profit while prices are high.

What else?

>>873417

>Infowars
>Zerohedge
>shtfplan.com
>fortressgoldgroup

Gee, those sure are some reliable sources.

>Denmark to stop printing cash by the end of this year.

Says they've already stopped producing notes and coins. One of the reasons for this, according to the article I'm reading, is that Denmark has a negative interest rate and therefore they want people to put their money in these accounts encouraging spending, instead of hoarding cash which of course has no negative interest. Two other reasons given were that physical cash is inefficient and that it can be used for evasion of laws and regulation, whereas digital cash is easier to track.

In other words, Denmark wants to have more control over how it's population spends money and wants Big Brother style oversight. Digital cash is the future I agree.

Digital cash =/= Bitcoin

>anonymity is the selling point.

Bitcoin isn't anonymous.

>>873436

>What terrifies me the most is you bring up nothing about the economic recession or collapse.

Why are you 'terrified'?

Sorry, I don't take Zerologic or Alex Jonestein or Max Keiserberg seriously. Go back and read their articles/watch their videos from 2011 - they were all screaming 'COLLAPSE IMMINENT! BUY GOLD/SILVER NOW! CRASH JP MORGAN! EUROZONE FINISHED!! CHINA + PUTIN ABOUT TO USA IN ASS!!!! THIS IS ROME 2.0!!!!!!!!'

..4 years later the USA remains the strongest country, militarily and financially, in the world. China is in pretty deep shit economically, with no demand for housing nor commodities, and manufacturing on the decline due to Obama's cunning plan to revitalize the manufacturing and energy industries. Gold and silver.. well, I think we all know about that. Yurop is in trouble, but it's not exactly an apocalypse - and there's still a lot of time to go yet.

>>873641
that's just one page, it's on at least 20+ different websites, take your pick.

alex jones is meant to devalue the news when he hits first page, that is his purpose.

He's Andreas tier.

>>873733

The burden of proof rests solely on you buddy

Show evidence of your claim 'jp morgan
chase bank are banning money' or GTFO

I have no patience for conspiratards, because my time alive has value.

Myth: "If everyone were to buy just a bit of Bitcoin, the price would explode and I would be filthy rich"

Reality: Suppose the entire US adult male population were to buy $100 of Bitcoin each. 101 million x $100 = $10.1 billion. $10.1 billion ÷ 14.55 million Bitcoins = $694.16/BTC added value. So even in this ridiculous imagining, the price won't even come close to the 2013 high!

inb4 some dumb cunt Bitcoiner says 'This is FUD, how did the price go up to $1241?' - Mark Karpeles bought up nearly $500 million dollars worth of Bitcoin on the open market with money that didn't exist (see the 'Willy Report'). The real value of Bitcoin is still in the process of being realized after this event which sent the price from $5 to $1241. Just do the math folks: 200,000 Bitcoin idiots x $1,000 investment each = $200 million. $200 million divided by 10 million (reasonably active) Bitcoins = $20/BTC.

>This is what Bitcoiners actually believe

Source: Survey of 2700 of these fools in March 2014 (https://imgur.com/a/E01D5))

>>875165
>If it's worth less than $500 it's worth nothing
Ahahaha, Bitfags folks.

>>860439
so your telling me the US and china miners are retards

how did it reach 1000$ last time

I can't reverse image search that conman vs educator image which is horrifying, wtf are you anyways.

and no there is no *bitcoin hype*

>>866854
kek

>>875680

>so your telling me the US and china miners are retards

The Bitcoin bagholders believed they'd get rich quick.

The miners are pulling out $1 million each and every day in the form of the Bitcoin block reward, or at ~$800,000 of that to pay for electricity usage.

As the price falls after the bubble burst, both miners and bagholders are finding themselves in a heap of shit.

>how did it reach 1000$ last time

Mark Karpeles bought up nearly $500 million worth of Bitcoins on his exchange MtGox. This was all done using non-existent money; numbers simply typed into a computer.

You can find more details/evidence by searching in Google 'The Willy Report'.

>>875165
>Stock markets take a small plunge last week.
>Bitcoin plunges down to sub-$200 with them.
Fucking LOL. Bitcoin really sticking it to that fiat currency!

>>875680
It reached 1k from bots , google "willie report" or "willie bot"

>>860439
OP is FUD though obviously

>>875981

You got rekt so hard that you had to abandon your shitty tired arguments and change tack to 'OP is FUD! Please, please don't listen to him..I need to get my money back..'

>>876209
I don't have any bitcoin though.

>>876209
Oh I used to be a supporter of your threads actually since last month during the Monero threads and what not, but the more im reading whether you are right or wrong there is something absolutely fishy about you.

And i'm starting to lose interest as your attempting to lose your edge on debating and resorted to DURR U GOT REKTTT,SHITTY ARGUEMENTS, assumption that im into bitcoin.

Very odd.

The new AntMiner S7, due to start shipping in late September, will not break-even on overall cost after 6 months even assuming the following:

- Flat difficulty (no network difficulty increases)
- $226.24/BTC (current rate)
- Electricity cost of $0.029/kWh
- 4% pool fee (fee of largest pool, F2Pool)

See attached picture for calculation using above figures

Remember folks, these S7s aren't on the market yet, so the difficulty hasn't increased yet to match them, which would make it even more unprofitable.

>>876243

>Oh I used to be a supporter of your threads actually since last month

I wasn't here last month shitwit

>but the more im reading whether you are right or wrong there is something absolutely fishy about you.

My arguments speak for themselves. The math is all laid out and clear; anyone can verify the claims I make themselves. I don't make vague claims like 'He/It is fishy' like you do.

>>876249
Yes the business model is meant for the bit mining pools to keep reinvesting.

There is no way you can mine bitcoin competing vs the warehouse pool miners.

>>876251
If you're so correct and sure why are you only on 4chan you already got destroyed multiple times in your own thread.

>>876251
So you just come to 4chan to spread news?

Nigga you just told me 2 weeks ago you have been in 4chan since 2006, and live a simple life and whatever mickey mouse bullshit you fed me when we had a conversation.

Im the guy that asks you what alt coin to buy etc.

ITT OP's fud

>>876253

>There is no way you can mine bitcoin competing vs the warehouse pool miners.

Protip: I'm talking about the warehouse pool miners.

Those figures are the figures for the mining operation in Kangding, which is probably the largest and most efficient Bitcoin mining operation in the world.

>If you're so correct and sure why are you only on 4chan you already got destroyed multiple times in your own thread.

You're just talking nonsense now.

>Nigga you just told me 2 weeks ago you have been in 4chan since 2006

You claimed I was making threads here last month, which I was not. That is what I was addressing.

Don't expect to get away with saying 'OP is FUD' after getting your shitty arguments in favor of Bitcoin refuted. Talk shit, get hit.

>>876268
Kangding
>$0.029/kWhr

Lol Mohammad pls go.

Word of advice,

Bitcoin by 2020 will be as valuable as gold.

>>876667
Is gold valuable?

XRP and Maidsafe. Enough said. Play into your ideologies and bay a shit coin that guarentees you get your taxless fleshlight without the gov't knowing and lose all your money when they fail. Play into logistics and your own financial interests and buy the currencies working with and improving the existing systems and have enough money to not give a fuck whos watching you.

>>860439
OP is a paid banking shill.

Move along folks.

>>876639

What's your point?

The guy running the operation said in his Bitcointalk thread that his electricity cost is $0.03/kWh. I think from memory he said it was $0.05/kWh for the other operation in Mongolia.

>you get your taxless fleshlight

In tax law in most developed countries (including USA), you are assumed guilty until proven innocent. So if you make money from or stash money in your shitcoins, you will be caught for tax evasion when you go to register a brand new Lamborghini in your name. Or more generally, any assets of significant value that you can't explain where you got the money to pay for. Worse still, they might suspect you of money laundering or dealing in proceeds of crime. Enjoy being the next Charlie Shrem, Roger Ver or Ross Ulbricht.

>>876667
>>876985

Thanks for bumping the thread so others have the opportunity to read my articles :^)

>>876680
>>877421

Forgot to link

>>876253
still fud tho, no one can be this pathetic.

>>876667
No, by the end of 2017 it will be more then 100k, and during the beginning of spring it should be about 10k+.

>>860439
also all your shit is about 1-2 years old, and the information that goes passed it is the government making there own crypto. But bitcoin will only last for 1-2 years when it hits passed 100k

>>877434
>also all your shit is about 1-2 years old

My articles were written 1-2 months ago. Because I've been observing Bitcoin since 2010, some of the stuff I bring up may seem like 'old news' to people new to Bitcoin (i.e. the gullible fucks like yourself who bought into the December 2013 bubble) - but regardless, these old points still stand.

Here's an example: The block size vs. transaction fee dilemma has been around for years. Some Bitcoiners who actually pay attention to the 'development' freak show will actually point this out, saying with a touch of smug 'It's no big deal, the developers have known about this for years. You're not the first one to realize this. Solutions are coming.' - well those solutions still haven't arrived since I first heard a Bitcoiner say this to me 2 years ago, and now things are coming to climax where the 1MB block size limit is being hit and the developers still don't have a clue what to do. It's because there is no solution. These proposed 'solutions' of sticking with Bitcoin as is or going with Bitcoin XT are merely aversions/irrelevancies. The developers who want to stick with Bitcoin as is, want most Bitcoin transactions to go 'off chain' - a euphemism for centralized transactions; Paypal would qualify as 'off chain'. The ones who want to go with XT, or just larger blocks, are going ahead with their eyes closed, and their supporters often make out the bandwidth problems to be minimal or misconstrue it (i.e. 'Disk space is cheap and growing in capacity' , when disk space isn't the problem, but internet bandwidth).

Most of the figures I use though, such as for mining calculations and predictions, are all up-to-date (as of the date those articles were written).

>>877431
>No, by the end of 2017 it will be more then 100k, and during the beginning of spring it should be about 10k+.

mfw

I can't tell if your just mocking Bitcoiners or you're a Bitcoiner who actually believes this shit

BTW, if you don't believe me on the catastrophic effects of increasing block sizes (increasing number of transactions), then take it from Bitcoiners themselves.

Pic related, it's from a report on the effects of a block size increase Bitfury (makers of the AntMiner machines) just released.

Note the daily traffic bandwidth usage and RAM usage.

For just 28 transactions per second (8MB blocks), you need 32GB RAM and 100GB of bandwidth a day. That's 3TB a month. No residential ISP is going to allow this; you will be cutoff in line with their 'Fair use' policy, even if you have a supposed 'unlimited' plan. Nodes will drop like flies, and no nodes = no network!

That's what you face when just trying to scale Bitcoin up to 28 transactions per second.

VISA does 2,000 transactions per second on average, with a peak capacity of 56,000 transactions per second.

So much for >muh global network, >muh remittances

Don't buy Bitcoin they started at $.70
and are now $228 really bad investment . Before this years out they will be $500 . Op is a fagget

>>860439

>5 reasons not to buy Bitcoin

All you need is one: it has no value. Anyone who bought into BTC is a moron, trying to make nonexistent profit on perceived value.

>>877612
Haha I got into bit coin when it was 5.50 and sold when it was 1068.67 so umm go fuck a goat .

>>877583
>>877622

Protip: The price rise from ~$5 to $1241 was caused by Mark Karpeles, who bought up nearly $500 million worth of Bitcoins on the open market which non-existent money (numbers typed into a computer; internal manipulation at his exchange MtGox).

This is all documented in the 'Willy Report':

https://willyreport.wordpress.com/2014/05/25/the-willy-report-proof-of-massive-fraudulent-trading-activity-at-mt-gox-and-how-it-has-affected-the-price-of-bitcoin/

MtGox is now gone, so I'm sorry that you lost a fuckton of money, but it's gone for good.

>>877636
I didnt lose shit .
Document that .

>>877681

Cool story bro

Where's the proof?

Oh wait, you're just a shill. Nevermind.

OP,you are such a massive retard. It's like you have all this information and conviction without a thread of intelligence, logic, or doubt in your own ideas.

Case in point >>875158
>Reality: Suppose the entire US adult male population were to buy $100 of Bitcoin each. 101 million x $100 = $10.1 billion. $10.1 billion ÷ 14.55 million Bitcoins = $694.16/BTC added value. So even in this ridiculous imagining, the price won't even come close to the 2013 high!
You retard. Do you think when someone buys btc they magically get a tiny portion of btc from everyone who owns bitcoins? Every buyer needs a matched seller and if everyone is buying bitcoins the price will go high as fuck. For the benefit of others (fuck you op there is no point trying to help you) here's how your example plays out in reality. 10.1B extra dollars are competing to buy the limited quantity of bitcoins that are being sold at any given time not all 14.5m bitcoins. The equation then isn't $10.1b ÷ 14.55m bitcoins, it is $10.1 b ÷ 0.1 million Bitcoins, tops. Gives a very different answer for the bitcoin price.

Op, you are such a stupid fuckwit that you explain a $1200 rise as the result of an outrageous $500 million investment while expecting a combined $10 billion investment to move the price less than $700. You should actually kill yourself.

>>877691
I don't got to prove shit to you .
>who the fuck are you ?
>the fucks I don't give about what you think .

>>877834

>it is $10.1 b ÷ 0.1 million Bitcoins, tops

So by your logic, if the price goes sky high, fewer Bitcoins will be sold than the miners produce in a single month?

The number of active Bitcoins (i.e. transferred in past ~3 years) is 10 million btw, as a point of note.

>>877834

>Op, you are such a stupid fuckwit that you explain a $1200 rise as the result of an outrageous $500 million investment while expecting a combined $10 billion investment to move the price less than $700.

What you have to keep in mind is that what Karpeles did was create artificial demand in a very short time frame. We're talking about a few months here. For the entire adult US population to buy Bitcoin, I would envisage it would take at least several years - not less than two months, as it did for the price to go from $83 to $1241.

I posit also that because the demand was entirely artificial and the real cause unknown to anyone but Mark Karpeles, those holding Bitcoin did not have a clue about why the price was skyrocketing and decided to sit tight. As it turns out, most Bitcoiners did *not* sell at the peak, or anywhere near it in fact, as most of them did not begin to sell until well after MtGox declared it was bankrupt. Just look at the exchange volume history and you'll get the picture.

Another aspect to that is the fact that the 'infrastructure' as it's called, just wasn't there and probably deterred a lot of people from selling. For instance, to sell Bitcoins on exchange you first had to complete a lengthy and risky verification process, and then you would have to wait a long time to withdraw funds after you completed your trade; and there was a lot of talk about how people weren't able to withdraw their funds - a lot of sellers on MtGox lost their money because it remained stuck with MtGox until the time Karpeles declared bankruptcy. And also there were problems with getting access to the Bitcoins themselves. Bitcoin had been largely forgotten since 2011, and people had lost their wallets due to passwords, hardware failure or not backing up their wallets properly. There's that famous story of the guy who claimed he missed on millions because he sent his hard drive to the tip.

(cont.)

>>877834

(cont.)

Another relevant factor to consider is that there were fewer Bitcoins in circulation. Since the beginning of 2014, 2 million more Bitcoins have been produced - and unlike many of those from 2010 and earlier, these are all very active, so we're looking at ~25% increase in active coins.

>>877867

You didn't come back with proof.. What a surprise..

>>877834

BTW, the $694.16 added value figure is how much you'd get if distributed the value evenly amongst Bitcoiners.

But let's take you at your word, and say only 0.1 million BTC would be sold. That's how much the Winklestein twins have don't they ("1% of all Bitcoins")?

So supposely only the two Winklebergs sold their Bitcoin hoard, they would get $10.1 billion for 100,000 BTC which is $101,000/BTC.

But know how much would left for every other Bitcoin holder? That's right, $0.

If you take a more reasonable figure like 10 million BTC, which is the number of Bitcoins transferred in the past ~3 years, that would mean an added value of $1,010.

If you want to be super conservative, you could half that to 5 million BTC, and it'd be $2,020/BTC added value.

Now I hear you say '$2020/BTC? Holy shit man, what's wrong with that?! BUY BITCOIN NOW!!!' - Not so fast schlomo; keep in mind that this is an imagining of a ridiculously delusional scenario, which is that every adult male in America buys a modicum of Bitcoin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPu6j-xpYyE

How long until this guy kills someone?

I could see him mutilating Gavin Andresen and/or Mike Hearn if Bitcoin XT or another proposal of theirs is successfully rammed down the throats of Bitcoiners. You think this guy is just going to let go of his precious social project that he's dedicated years to?

The dude is a dedicated anarchist and a nutjob - a deadly mix.

A glimpse into this man's sordid mind: Back in 2011 he offered on Bitcointalk $25/hour for the provision of 'Two 16 year old girls together' or 'One 16 year old girl + one 18 year old boy' to Skype with him, or $10/hour for just the girl/boy.

He also leaked the passwords of Bitcoinica users, being an operator of the exchange, causing one of the largest thefts in Bitcoin history - and afterwards he said "For me tbh, I could care less about people like Roger Ver who have a lot of money lost because they have lots more". Intersango, which he founded, also went bust taking some of the clients money with it.

He illegally squats buildings and steals electricity/wifi, and believes no (but himself of course) has a right to private property - even Theymos, who is a retarded anarchist, says of him 'his worldview is very alien to me' and 'he has a strange (to me) way of looking at the world which sometimes causes issues'.

>>877971

Sorry, I made a mistake there. He wasn't soliciting young girls/boys.. he was the one who was selling them.

"these girls are really horny and excited about doing this."

>BitCucks

>>878133

>>860439
OP what are your predictions on what happens next or the phases though.
I have been reading your stuff,but most of the content goes passed all of this info I mean *after*.

>>878248

>but most of the content goes passed all of this info I mean *after*

What?

>>878297
Sorry I meant the source where I get the information. But only so far I found 2 sources, your the third one. THey have 2 different predictions after yours but what is your own after september or october/.

Rise or fall etc, new coin etc.

>>878303

I still don't understand what exactly you are asking

I'm not a conspiratard like most Bitcoiners are, but it's funny how they trust Gavin.

>>878309
What alt coins are you currently interested in?

>>878325

None.

I'm still yet to take a closer look at 'DASH'

>>877834
>OP,you are such a massive retard.
>You retard.
>Op, you are such a stupid fuckwit... You should actually kill yourself.
Christ, no wonder 4chan needed a containment board to contain all you cancerous Bitcoiners.

>>878407
that.....meme

Little fun fact about Satoshi: He personally recommended storing Bitcoins with MtGox and MyBitcoin (both frauds), and advocated a move from wallets held by individuals to online wallet services.

Shit man. Better delete my Bitcoin wallet these bitcoins I bought when they were $100 are only worth $200.

Fuck bitcoins. And you're right about another thing fuck anarchists too the government knows what's best for. Far better to put my money in the stock market that shit is not a zero sum game and only ever goes - up

>>879063
=W=

>>878921
So if there was an economic crash or rescission globally, do you think people will jump to bitcoin? Or a current existing altcoin?

>>879081

>do you think people will jump to bitcoin? Or a current existing altcoin?

No. The US dollar is king, and it looks like it's going to be that way for the foreseeable future.

>I bought when they were $100 are only worth $200.

Proof or GTFO shill.

>And you're right about another thing fuck anarchists too the government knows what's best for.

Yeah dude, right on!

Let's scrap the corrupt establishment and start again from scratch.. with angels like Karpeles, Shrem, Ver, Pierce, Ulbricht, Garza and so on. Hey, it's gotta be better than what we have right now, right?

>Far better to put my money in the stock market that shit is not a zero sum game and only ever goes - up

Stocks produce value, Bitcoin does not.

If I put $10,000 in a Farming Machinery company, they can use that money to build more efficient machinery, which produces more crops. I can expect to reap the end rewards of those extra crops, which might be say, 5% a year.

If I put $10,000 in Bitcoin, it does nothing. It just sits there. I cannot make any money from this, except by stealing money from others.

>>879237
>>879063

>>877431
>No, by the end of 2017 it will be more then 100k, and during the beginning of spring it should be about 10k+.
huehuehue
we're 2/3 of the way thru 2015, and Bitcoin's still struggling to get up from the low $200's

>>860439
that is because bitcoin was a fad just like Ejuice/vape thing is.

I made 50,000 easy money by selling bitcoin machines. KNC Jupiter was the shit if you had it at hand.

uh oh!
http://www.zdnet.com/article/bitcoin-miners-digitalbtc-6-77m-in-the-red/

>>860439

>>881181

Warren Buffet has already looked at and seen through Bitcoin.

inb4 you say 'He's trying to get people to stay away from Bitcoin so he can it all for himself!!!' or 'He's old and doesn't understand it!!!!!!' - he understood exactly why Bitcoin sucks as an investment, even if it does work, in saying 'A cheque is a way of transmitting money too - are cheques worth a whole lot of money?'

He also says, 'This idea that it has some huge intrinsic value is just a joke in my view'.

Buffett understands that the profits derived from investment come from real growth. By investing in stocks, the companies can use the money to be more productive. It's why he's not into gold and why he saw through the Dot com bubble, because both of these didn't produce any extra value.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewMYbX47-IE

>>881067

There was some other Bitcoin company that posted a similar loss recently I was reading about.. can't remember the name, but I think it was one of the ones trying to be a Bitcoin 'marketplace'.

>>877916

you are both wrong, thats not how any of this works

a good portion of the players are "rational"

if youll notice the "market cap" is just the available supply x the current price , 3.3 billion us dollars arent currently "caught up" in bitcoin , thats just how much would result if every coin sold for the current price

but the current price is illusionary, what can I buy with btc? hell if the darknet markets suddenly jacked up prices 100% it would have a profound effect on bitcoins price without the underlying price of heroine having budged

its an intermediary form of sotring value with no real world application

if 10 billion in real money suddenly in a single day enterd the market prices would skyrocket but it wouldnt follow the same marketcap = price x volume formula that it does now because it would be new money

how much actual NEW money has to enter everyday, at these prices to maintain them? thats the question, how many coins are mined daily and enter the market?

>>880444
>fad just like Ejuice/vape thing is

they have 6% of the market share of all tobacco users in 3 years and its a multibillion dollar industry

they took a vice , an addictive substance and removed 95% of the health consequences, unless the government steps in to prop up big tobacco "ejuice / vape thing" is about as much of a "fad" as "moving pictures' and "horseless carriages"

>>881191

>if youll notice the "market cap" is just the available supply x the current price

This does not disprove anything I have said. I already understand this.

The scenario imagined is that $10.1 billion is poured into Bitcoin, so any estimate of the existing amount of money in Bitcoin is irrelevant.

We know that there are 14.55 million Bitcoins, so it's a simple matter of dividing $10.1 billion by 14.55 million coins to get the added value per Bitcoin, which is $694.16/BTC.

The point I make here is that even with a massive dump of money into Bitcoin, so long it is gradual and not a sudden hit like the fraudulent $500 million purchase done by Mark Karpeles in 2013, the best a Bitcoin holder can hope for is to double/triple/quadruple his money - but the chance of this huge investment is also extremely slim, and the chances of losing all your money (or a great deal of it) I posit is probable. Most Bitcoiners still believe, or did they did as of last year (>>875165) that they would be seeing a return of 10x, 100x or even 3000x the current price (see attached pic).

>how much actual NEW money has to enter everyday, at these prices to maintain them? thats the question, how many coins are mined daily and enter the market?

3600BTC per day currently

Which is over $1 million per day, and perhaps $800,000 of that goes towards paying electricity costs:

https://archive.is/wGfZi

>>881199

Actually that would be $828,000 per day now.

I made that calculation when the price was at $280 or something around that, now it's at $230.

>>881200
WAIT WAIT WAIT, I re did my research,

I remember a post you did a while ago about Yes there will be a digital currency or digital money coming out but it's not going to be the current cryptos right now, or the ones that are P&D.

Has it been created yet? or being created? or will it be goverment made?

I redid all my resources because of you jesus christ.

And now you are one of them.

>>860439
>Pyramid Scheme
>Bitcoin
>Doesn't know what a pyramid scheme is

A pyramid scheme is something that brings you profit from the work of others while you get more the higher you are up the pyramid.

Bitcoin is comparable to ore mining where these that mine earlier get the ore cheaper than those who come later and you sell when the ore becomes more rare and thus has a greater value. Or on stock market: If you buy a share early enough before the company gets hyped and then you sell on the hype... that's normal market behavior.

In a typical pyramid scheme, you sell your shit to others that then sell the same shit to more while you get a part of the profit from the selling of each in the levels below you.

Your Bitcoins only give you profit, when you give them away at a good price - but then they are gone for you and won't generate any more profit. That's simple "buy low sell high" procedure what's going on on stock market billion times a day.

Go back to bed, kid.

>>881226

When you buy stocks in an ore mining company, you derive a profit from what the ore mining company does with that money, which is to turn something useless (rock and dirt) into something useful (refined material). Thus your profit is derived from actual growth (what is referred to the 'fundamentals').

When you invest your money into Bitcoin, your money does not go towards improving or producing anything. Bitcoin's utility remains the same with or without your investment. Thus the only profit you can derive from it is not from any real growth, but money you steal from others.

In most stocks and commodities and the like we call this 'speculation'. It's essentially just gambling with your money. Only fools speculate when it comes to investing, but it is not immoral or illegal if the parties involved know what they are getting into, as it is essentially a 1:1 bet.

What *is* immoral and illegal, is to pull the wool over someone's eyes by presenting a speculative bet as an 'investment'. Thus traders who con mum & dad investors into Forex trading and say they can make money are guilty of foreign exchange fraud.

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

Even worse is to con an investor into speculating, when the speculative bet is not 1:1 but is skewed in the favor of someone else. With Bitcoin, the bet is highly skewed towards the early adopters' - people who mined Bitcoins for virtually nothing (a few cents for electricity) and thus stand to lose almost nothing if the bet does not resolve in their favor. Furthermore, Bitcoin was intentionally designed so that this skew is created and the early adopters profit at the expense of the latecomers. Since Bitcoin produces no extra value from investment, where does the profit the early adopters make come from? From the pockets of the latecomers of course. This is the definition of a pyramid scheme, which is illegal both to promote and participate in (ignorant or not of it being a pyramid scheme).

You can print cheques so they are worthless. They aren't scarce but useful.

Bitcoin has a fixed supply. It's scarce and useful.

To compare cheques to bitcoin and call them methods of transferring money and since cheques are worthless then so too are bitcoins is to highlight how ignorant one truly is to blockchain tech.

>>881814

>You can print cheques so they are worthless. They aren't scarce but useful.

You misunderstand the analogy. The value of Bitcoin because of its scarcity is neither here nor there; what matters is that you can't make a profit out of it except by fleecing others - it's a pyramid scheme.

>>881827
Ayy lmao

Yeah because a pseudo-anonymous, decentralized, global payment processing service is valueless.

>>881842

>Yeah because a pseudo-anonymous, decentralized, global payment processing service is valueless.

In the same sense that a cheque is 'valueless' as an investment. A cheque is useful, but it doesn't make you money.

BTW, Bitcoin is no longer pseudonymous, decentralized or global. It's garbage.

>>881867
Yeah cheques work so well with computers and online retail. Cheques and bitcoin are the same things. How hasn't everyone figured this out yet.

>>881908

The point is that cheques are not profitable even though they are useful shitwit.

Bitcoin isn't even useful though. Give me Paypal's 0% domestic rate for instant transactions any day over Bitcoin, which costs me $$$ in exchange + transactions fees + extreme market rate volatility, without having any other benefits.

>>881925
The reason is scarcity and online business dumbfuck.
Cheques are not useful online and they can be printed as required.

>>881959

Buffett's point was that cheques are useful, but that doesn't make them worth money.

Cheques don't produce any extra value, so you can't make a profit on it, even if they're useful.

The same is with Bitcoin: If you put money into Bitcoin, it does not produce anything of extra value as with a stock. Thus the only profit you can get from it must be from the pockets of other investors. It's a pyramid scheme.

>>881970
Do you know what a currency is?

>>882017

If you can't comprehend or willfully ignore the arguments of your opponents, that just reflects poorly on you.

BTW folks, the developers of Bitcoin and people such as Andreas not only admit but advocate the fact that most Bitcoin usage will be going 'off-chain', which is a euphemism for centralized services, like Coinbase and Changetip, which would be Paypal 2.0 - Even Paypal might become one of these 'off-chain' services).

The Bitcoiners opposing Bitcoin XT, aka 'Hearncoin', are actually leaving behind the 'original vision', but in a different way. Rather than potentially rendering the network inoperable by allowing up to 8MB blocks and thus also fucking up the future rewards incentive for miners, the developers and people like Theymos who want to stick to the current 1MB are advocating keeping the elite few on Bitcoin and everyone else gets put on 'off-chain' centralized services that renders the whole thing completely redundant and pointless - Why do I need a centralized service for using Bitcoin, when I already have Paypal who 1) Don't force me to transact using something highly volatile, 2) Aren't likely to defraud me, 3) Charge 0% domestic fee, and 4) Provide me with instant transactions.

>>882032
ELI5 / general rundown of the bitxcoinxt thing?

>Bitcoin meme still going
Top kek

>>882220

Bitcoin right now has an artificial 1MB block size limit, and Bitcoin XT would raise this to 8MB. There's also other alternative proposals, all with the aim of the increasing the block size limit.

The block size limit needs to be raised because it's already been hit before, and what happens is that transactions get bottlenecked - since 1MB size limit means only ~2000 transactions per 10 minutes (3.5 per second). Not only do transactions not go through, or slow to a crawl even with a substantial fee attached, but nodes may exceed their memory capacity as unsent transactions build up in the memory pool.

There are several problems with raising the limit to 8MB, but one is that nodes will be overloaded in terms of bandwidth and memory requirements, and to a lesser extent storage space. Another perhaps less obvious problem - and this is one reason why 1MB is still being clinged to - is that if you increase the transaction capacity, you decrease the fee competition to get your transaction included in a block. Block rewards for miners are halving, and in just a few years time virtually the entire reward must come from transaction fees - if block sizes were to become practically limitless, then free transactions would be included in blocks, and how much of a reward would miners be getting from transaction fees then?

So it's a damned if you do; damned if you don't situation.

Also there is an opposition to Bitcoin XT specifically, because of other changes it makes, like Hearn's plan to place on a lower priority TOR users. The intention according to him is to prevent something like a DDOS as I recall it, but those opposed see it as effectively banning users who want to remain anonymous.

Originally Gavin Andresen, pusher of Bitcoin XT and former Bitcoin Lead Dev, wanted 20MB blocks. He compromised to 8MB, but many core developers like the Catholic nut luke-jr and other top knobs like Theymos won't budge.

>>882220
>>882522

And I'd like to say I'm surprised about this next thing I'm going to point out, but to be honest it doesn't surprise me seeing where Bitcoin has been going since 2010/2011, when the main incentive is just to make money.

1MB blocks entail a majority of users being shoved off the network and into 'off-chain solutions', if the network is to grow/'scale'. Not only is this an inevitable consequence, but people like Theymos and Andreas Antonopoulos have openly declared their support of it!

'Off-chain' means no longer on the Bitcoin network. It means using centralized services like Coinbase and Changetip. In other words, Paypal 2.0.

The elite few who use Bitcoin, will have to pay ridiculous transaction fees to get their transaction included in those 1MB blocks. Everyone else will be relegated to using these 'off-chain' entities, and you have to ask - what is the point? Who is even going to buy into this idea? It's a comforting thought perhaps for those who hold large sums of Bitcoin, like Theymos, but for everybody else.. who wants a worse and less popular version of Paypal? So I think these 1MB block people are unscrupulous as well as deluded.

>>882522
>Block rewards for miners are halving
http://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/
Oh so THIS is why Bitcoiners keep telling everyone that the price is going to shoot back up to $500+.
Because if it doesn't, then mining coins will just lose you money and the whole fucking network will grind to a halt as everyone unplugs their rigs.

>>882920

This is also why miners are opposed to increasing the block size limit. If the block size is kept small, people will have to pay transaction fees to the miners to be sure that transactions are included.

>Bitcoin will protect muh monies from the government! The law can't do jack shit about Bitcoin!

LOL

Check out this sucker who got an education on reality the hard way

tl;dr 'Oh it's in 'bitch Coins' is it? No problem, we'll just take your car, your house, and whatever else you have that is of actual value. Enjoy that monopoly money o' yours Sir.'

BTW, jratcliffe63367, a moderator on /r/Bitcoin got the boot. Instead of opposing Theymos directly, he cucked out and only whined in an independent article - but even that was too much for the Dictator of bitCoin to tolerate. Bitcoiners tell us that they want to rid the world of the corrupt evil banksters(!), but who are they going to be replaced with? People like Theymos, Garza, Karpeles, Shrem, Ver, Pierce, Hearn, luke-jr, and all the rest of the gang?

This is what you get when you scrap the 'established' system, which isn't perfect, but isn't starting from scratch either. Bitcoiners are like a bunch of teenage/20-something 'Fuck the system!' dipshits who call themselves 'anarchists' ..wait, as a matter of fact, that's what they actually are! These views don't survive for long, because as most adults come to realize, simple ideas are rarely adequate to address the problems that have thus far remained insoluble.

>>884568
How do you care so much about something so pointless?

>>882920
So that's basically a Bitcoin death counter then? Sweet. I can't wait to watch the hilarity in 323 days.

>>863053
>So, for example you could have an entire company administrated via code instead of relying on CEO's and shit like that.

When I hear shit like this, I start to roll my eyes. This is SF comp sci fart huffing at best.

>>884568
You've been posting on /biz/ for weeks/months

Jesus Christ if you aren't the epitome of a paid shill I don't know what is

>>884568
Oh yeah, and weren't you that guy about a month ago that said if the price went to $200 then 99% of the miners would stop mining?

Yeah...

https://blockchain.info/charts/hash-rate

And now you're moaning about the block size limit?

>>860439
OP is

L I T E R A L L Y

a paid shill.

Who is signing his checks?

>>884617
It dipped below for less than an hour then rallied back to 230

>>884662
Regardless.

He literally said if it goes anywhere near $200 that "99%" of miners would leave.

Well it went to $162, then back under $200 again a week later, yet the hash rate remains solid.

>>884672
>>884617

Go back and read what I said, in both my posts and my articles. I explicitly stated that the price must be SUSTAINED at $200 for AT LEAST A WEEK (examples: >>866944, >>872371, >>869355).

I explained the reasoning for that as follows: If you are a miner who stands to lose $1 a day if you continue mining, do you turn off your machines the instant that starts to happen? Probably not, because $1 is an insignificant loss. It may not even be worth your time and effort going to the trouble of turning off your mining machines, especially when you probably expect the price to jump back up again after a brief while, and then having to get everything going again. But what about after a week? A $10 loss is more significant, and at that point, the miner would likely start to worry 'Is the price going to go back up anytime soon?'.

Anyone can do the calculations themselves to verify my estimation as appropriate and correct. I've run through the math in one of my articles. If you find any errors in it or anything I've left out, let me know:

https://archive.is/77l3J

>>884614
>>884620

Suppose I am a paid shill - Can you point out anything I have said that is wrong or in error?

If you can't refute my claims, then it just makes you look desperate to put a lid on any criticism of bitCoin.

If you're interested in my motivations, two of the main reasons I make posts about Bitcoin is:

a) I enjoy gloating over the demise of greedy Bitcoiners and the failure of their bad ideas, and

b) I feel that I must speak out against Bitcoin, because not only is it is a bad idea (deeply flawed), but it is a wicked one - we must put an end to this pyramid scheme as soon as possible before more naive retirees and young adults get snared into it and lose their money.

>>884614
>>884620

BTW, the word 'shill' implies I am shilling for something. I am not shilling anything; rather, I am saying Bitcoin is garbage, and I am producing both reasons and evidence to that effect.

It doesn't even matter if Bitcoiners sell or 'HODL' - their money is gradually being sucked out the system by miners, who are currently receiving ~$800,000 per day, most of which likely goes to paying electricity costs which are unavoidable/non-deferrable.

And it's the same with the block size vs. transaction fee dilemma I point out. The faster Bitcoin grows; greater it becomes, the faster it hastens its own demise, as the network cannot scale. It matters not whether you sell your shitcoins or not.

But any reasonable person provided with all this information, as well as the Willy Report which explains exactly why there those great big bubbles (which can no longer happen, now that MtGox is gone), surely must come to the conclusion that investing money in this pyramid scheme is not at all a wise idea.

Not how I never say 'Sell your Bitcoins now!' (although I might say it in future to ruse butthurt shitcoin bagHODLers), because I think anyone who reads my arguments against Bitcoin will likely come to the right conclusion themselves. I'm not like Bitcoiners, who feel a need to guide the bowling ball down the alley with outbursts and gestures, long after having released the grip of it.

When Bitcoiners do this, saying 'This guy's a shill!' or 'You're just butthurt you didn't buy Bitcoins at $5' and so forth, it's just more anecdotal evidence in support my claim that Bitcoiners have no counter-arguments to what I argue that stand up to scrutiny.

The former lead developer (still key core developer) of Bitcoin, Gavin Andresen, has had his 'expert' tag removed by Theymos.

Gavin Andresen is also the guy pushing Bitcoin XT with Mike Hearn, for those who don't know, which Theymos opposes and is censoring even the mere mention of. Talking about Bitcoin XT = permaban, plus the CSS has to been changed to hide mention of [deleted] comments, so viewers who aren't regulars don't even know censorship is taking place.

These people aren't 'libertarians' folks. By 'libertarian' they mean they want the ability to do what they want to other people, such as stealing their money through a pyramid scheme and not have those damn pesky law enforcement officers in their way. Liberty, riches and power for themselves; not for others.

Another victim of the purge

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CR1X3zV6X5Y

>>885025
What about bitcoin do you think is a bad idea? If nothing but a concept bitcoin is an excellent idea.

You think it's "wicked" why? Because you think it will inevitably fail? That makes it a bad investment, not "wicked".

>>884614
>the epitome of a paid shill
>>884620
>OP is
>L I T E R A L L Y
>a paid shill.
Are you morons legitimately fucking retarded? how the fuck is that guy "an accomplice of a swindler who poses as a genuine customer to entice or encourage others."

>>885238
>What about bitcoin do you think is a bad idea? If nothing but a concept bitcoin is an excellent idea.

In this article I summarize some key reasons why Bitcoin is both a bad investment and a bad idea:

5 reasons why NOT to buy into the Bitcoin hype
https://archive.is/gbGx1

Read point 5 in particular.

The fact that Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme is enough in itself to say that it is morally wicked.

Here's another little problem Bitcoin faces: Solar superstorms

A repeat of the 1859 Carrington event would be catastrophic for Bitcoin. And these events aren't as unlikely as you might think. In fact, we narrowly missed a repeat as recently as 2012:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_2012

The chance of a catastrophic solar storm occurring in just the next 10 years is 12%.

Source: http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/23jul_superstorm/

This is an alarmingly high figure to me, but suppose the Bitcoiner says 'I'll take my chances' - well, you say Bitcoin is the 'future' don't you? Presuming both you and Bitcoin are around for at least the next 50 years, what are the chances of a solar storm in that stretch of time? Still like your odds?

Of course Bitcoiners don't worry about this, because they're not concerned with what happens several decades from now - their only concern is getting rich quick within the next 2-3 years maximum.

Still it's worthwhile pointing out, because it shows how fragile Bitcoin is, and ultimately how it is a banrkrupt idea long-term.

any casinos still accepting buttcoins?

>>885786

Gold isn't worth anything. What of an asteroid made of gold crashed into earth where the gold can easily be collected.

Don't you guys think of the future?

> mohamMAD pls

guys... guys... i don't understand what the heck you;re all talking about with your jargon and conspiracy stuff.... just tell me, should i invest in bitcoins or not?
i wanna make some cash for a new gamer PC.
thanks.

whats up with this junk

>>886643

smart chinamen are taking stock while it's cheap

If you don't own Bitcoin yet kill yourself.

>>885014
Lemme guess OP, you are 50 years old and live in the philippines with a 25-26 year old girlfriend.

>>886483

Gold was not mentioned once in my post.

>>886643

Not related to Bitcoin.

>>886815

Guess again.

BTW, what happened to Ethereum folks?

There's no pressure left in the pump - $1.21 and falling.

>>886795
>>886815
>>886483

BTW, thanks for the reply bumps fellas

More hits for my articles in the OP, and thus more people being educated about the Bitcoin scam for what it is :^)

Bitplebs listen up - the Dear Leader has announced his vision of the Glorious Great Leap Forward (culturally and financially)

Rather than go ahead with larger blocks, Theymos' resolution is to keep the block size to a minimum so that miners will only include a limited number of transactions with fees set at high heaven, BUT there is an alternative cunning plan: Transaction fees will be SCRAPPED entirely, and both companies and bitcoins users will donate money towards an 'assurance contract' that will incentivize miners so they'll stay afloat for a brief period of time. Ta-dah!

I'm not making this shit up folks, it's straight from the scripture.

The Dear Leader has also revealed to us that he alone knows the mind of the one true God and savior of mankind (Satoshi). Pic related. We're now just one short of a trinity. Andreas?

Theymos is ignorant of a lot of things, but at least he realizes the node bandwidth dilemma, and how Bitcoin is fucked either way because of it.

Bitcoiners take note. If you won't take it from me, at least listen to one of your own who has been in Bitcoin from pretty much the very beginning.

>>887081
fuck you

Ethereum when

>>887089

Never by the looks of it

How long has Ethereum been out now? Well over a month hasn't it? The price has gone from ~$3.50 just prior to release down to ~$1.20 and it has stayed there.

Like I said of it before, there's no pressure left in the pump. See Bitshares for what happens hereon in. Bitshares is actually very similar to Ethereum as far as I can tell; same purpose, and same decent amount of hype, but it fell flat when it came to the crunch. Probably because the use for it is so vague and technical that very few people actually had a use for it or interest in it, which I see as being the same case with Ethereum.

>>887094
Im Gonna buy like 20 ether coins and let em sit, probably.
See you when they're worth 1 grand each

>>887114
See you never. It might go up, but to a grand, get real.

>>887114

It doesn't matter how many times you try to keep the faith, so to speak, by saying 'Fuck you' or 'This guy's a paid shill' or 'Bitcoin is going to $10K next week' or some other nonsense, because all that matters in the end is that as of today $850,000 is being taken out of the system by miners - and this is going to happen every day going forward.

So even if Bitcoiners 'HODL', they're done for. And no one buys into the 'Get rich quick' lie anymore, because the price has been gradually falling for almost two years now, from $1241 down to $238 right now. People forego their rationality when the price is rising exponentially, not when it's steadily falling.

And we know that even if people did get enthused again in this way for whatever reason, it wouldn't be enough to create a big bubble like the two we saw in 2013. For two reasons, which are that those bubbles were created by internal manipulation at MtGox (half a billion dollars worth of fake buy orders on the open market in a short space of time), and that the hundreds of thousands or otherwise millions of dollars being taken out of the system every day by miners is enough to offset/outweigh any investment. Not to mention all the desperate bagHODLers, who are lying in wait at higher price levels like $400, $500, etc. to sell and get their money back (they never will of course, because the money is already gone).

>>887664
thanks bro, i was about to buy 1 bitcoin, you saved me money.
coz u know, i know nothing about this finance stuff, i just thought sep 24 doom will make bitcoin popular but guess not.
gonna stock up on toilet paper and canned food now instead of bitcoins.

>>887664
why are you such a huge faggot

>>887664

>>860439
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-09-07/isle-of-man-tax-haven-with-tailless-cats-becomes-bitcoin-hub

>>860439

>>860439
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3495776-bitcoin-is-for-real-and-it-is-all-about-the-flow-of-money

>>860439
this is all news just in these few days alone kek

>>860961
It's the jews worried about their kike bucks and as usual attempting to muddy the waters. Islam has no issue with BTC.

The jew problem will be taken care of on the 28th of September once and for all with their oath broken for the third time on earth. Which means it's time to break them...again once and for all.

>>888255
the bad thing is: the meme is real xD
arm yourselves brothers

Bitcoin is not money, it is a game being played by neckbeards and drug dealers. Getting involved in this horseshit is loser-tier and I hope you all get fucked over.

>>885289
Why do you use an archive for your own medium blog posts?

>>888202
>>888203
>>888205
>>888206
>>888208

All arguments from authority. Where's the substance to those articles? According to you, a mere headline is a convincing argument.

The amount of VC funding I believe has substantially fallen, not that it really matters anyway as throwing money around does nothing to fix Bitcoin.

Also note how the money is going to into Bitcoin companies, and not Bitcoin itself. As you most likely know yourself, the biggest beneficiary of this funding has been 21 Inc. whose business idea is to install Bitcoin miners in fridges and toasters and make money mining at the expense of the naive buyer - 'Buy this, and you'll receive 50% of the Bitcoins you mine just by using your toaster!' ..no mention of the electricity cost.

Let's take a closer look at the companies mentioned in this articles:

>Chain Inc.

A company that is planning to provide some vague use of the 'blockchain technology', not Bitcoin.

The article even says:

"These financial companies don’t have any interest in using the actual currency. But they see the “blockchain” technology that lets Bitcoin users instantaneously make and record transactions as a potential replacement for what they say is a cumbersome, costly and less-secure process."

>Coinbase

An exchange. A sensible investment because it skims the money off of users with minimal operating costs.

>Circle

An exchange. A sensible investment because it skims the money off of users with minimal operating costs.

Isle of Man is old news, and is chosen as a location for grey legal activities because it's a tax haven and no doubt turns a blind eye so long as they're making money.

Seekingalpha is not a reputable source. It's similar to Zerohedge. I would take apart the article, but some reason it wouldn't let me read beyond page 2 (paywall?), and there was nothing to address in those first 2 pages of babble about how dumb he is (which I would probably agree with).

>>888273

Because I decided to pre-empt any talk of shilling my own articles for ad revenue or whatever. Medium doesn't give revenue to authors of course, but I don't think Bitcoiners are smart enough to look that up before they post 'SHILL! SHILL! PAID SHILL!' - some Bitcoiner was actually going on like this in the previous thread.

You know what I think to myself when Bitcoiners go on about VC funding? If these wankers actually believed in Bitcoin, then they would not be thrilled with this glut of VC funding, but find it deeply concerning. After all, wasn't Bitcoin designed to be a self-sufficient system that did not necessitate and could not be undermined by 3rd parties? Why then all this VC funding; why does Bitcoin have a need for any of it?

Don't you see? Bitcoin was designed to rid us of this supposed oligarchical system, and now it is being co-opted by this supposed oligarchy, with Bitcoiners cheering it on.

So when Bitcoiners rave on about how great it is that some guy from Morgan Stanley or whatever says he supports and wants to adopt Bitcoin, whether in the form of just the 'blockchain technology' or not, it makes me think of the opposite of a positive development.

What I've noticed is that many Bitcoiners are confused by this - that is, of these 'evil banksters' voicing their support for or even funding Bitcoin-related startups - and they tend to either conclude that they must be gullible/stupid and hastening their own demise, or that they have 'seen the light' and are desperately trying to scramble for a small piece of the future lest they be left entirely in the dust. Bitcoiners simply cannot square the fact that Bitcoin is not a threat to the established system.

>>889563

But this foolishness on the part of Bitcoiners will not go unpunished for long.. From what I've read and heard of most of these startups and ideas that are being encouraged and invested in, they're shrewd proposals that I think will give Bitcoiners a bit of a rude shock.

21 Inc. for instance is probably the most highly funded of the startups ($100+ mil), and what is its great vision? To put ASIC miners in smartphones and toasters to mine peanuts, and take a cut of the resulting money. It's profitable so long as people are gullible enough to fall for a discounted smartphone say, and then pay more than what's worth in electricity cost.

Most of the rest of the money is going to either exchanges or 'blockchain technology' companies. Note how none of it ever goes into Bitcoin itself, or towards the developers, the later of which is probably both the single most important and needy part of Bitcoin.

I say Bitcoiners are going to get a rude shock, because they seem to think that regardless of whether these venture capitalists and 'banksters' realize it or not, Bitcoin itself is what is ultimately going to be promoted and thus those invested in it will stand to profit - but this isn't what is going to happen. Bitcoiners think the phrase 'blockchain technology' is merely a confusion, but it's not; it means that they're going to incorporate whatever is good about Bitcoin's technology into *their own* systems. This wouldn't have much consumer side value, but it might be useful for internal management. And the exchanges and miners like 21 Inc are in fact leeching money directly out of the Bitcoin system if you think about it.

>>889563
>why does Bitcoin have a need for any of it?
Because for a lot of people, it is just another financial instrument.

>2015 and 3/4
>still NOT owning any Bitcoins
Lol.

>>889790
Shit, even if you don't trust bitcoins, diversifying and putting a little here and there amongst other cryptos is definitely worth it.

>>889802
You need to be insane to not own some at this point. As for the FUDsters, thinking before writting is also adviced.

Stocks are a completely different story than bitcoin.

Stocks are a subset of the economy. To compare bitcoin to a stock accurately you would need to find one stock that measured an encapsulated industry which did not have competitors.

For example, if you felt that the automobile was an invention which was destined to grow when it was first created, there was no single stock to buy. You could perhaps buy Ford, or GM eventually, yet there was not any one single unit of measure which was tied directly into the invention.

The same thing when the TV was invented. If you felt that it was destined to change the world, the best you could do was perhaps buy RCA, but even that did not measure its growth properly because of competitors who would eventually come to market.

Now if you could somehow find some investment vehicle which offered somebody to profit on the expansion of the car market, or TV market which was not tied to any one specific centralized company, that would be a much closer comparison to what bitcoin represents.

Just like when the internet was first invented. There was no one single investment opportunity which allowed investors to bet on the entire Internet.

Bitcoin is different because you are betting on the entire growth of this disruptive Earth changing opportunity with this one single unit...the bitcoin.

So as compared to looking at stock charts which do not measure the growth of an industry, rather the growth of one single centralized company within that industry, the price of bitcoin is an actual measure of the entire industry in itself.

>>889802

>Giving away your sensitive personal information and being put on a priority government watch list for participating in a small way in a pyramid scheme
>Worth it

lol no. Unless you already have a sliver of Bitcoin from mining long ago, it's not worth it.

>>889821

>Stocks are a completely different story than bitcoin.

Yes, but not for the garbage reasons you went on to describe. Stocks are different to shitcoins, because stocks actually produce value.

If I buy stocks in a farming machinery company, that company (ideally) then uses the money to improve their hardware or build more of it. In the end, this means farmers are producing more goods for society. Real profit is generated, therefore I can see real profit on my investment too (i.e. 5% p.a.).

What do you produce by putting your money in Bitcoin? Nothing. Therefore you cannot expect any profit, and the only money you can gain is that which comes from the pockets of other investors. In other words, Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme. And to make things worse - to accelerate the unraveling of this pyramid scheme - miners are taking out some $850,000 from the pockets of investors as of right now each and every single day.

>>889821

>As for the FUDsters, thinking before writting is also adviced.

>writting
>adviced

Bitcoiners folks.

>>890223
Doesn't understand the difference between a pyramid scheme and a Ponzi.

Keeps calling bitcoin a pyramid.

Lol

>>891117

Care to explain to us what I'm mistaken about exactly friend?

Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme rather than a ponzi scheme because it's not a lone individual (i.e. Satoshi) who profits at the expense of the rest, but the group of 'early adopters' who sell to the greater fools, who in turn sell to even greater fools - until the scheme runs out of potential buyers and it collapses leaving most of the fools with nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAeaqeN-shs

IT'S THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE!