'Taken To The Cleaners' - NZ Herald
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news ... d=11961101
"Over the past two weeks, the cost to complete a transaction has skyrocketed from about $US6 on average to $US26 last Friday, ArsTechnica reported, courtesy of the bitcoin network itself, which is struggling to process more than four transactions per second."
...
"In the network's early days, bitcoin boosters would tout the network's fast payments and near-zero fees. But now users sometimes have to choose between paying more than $US20 in fees or waiting hours — if not days — for their transactions to complete."
In a recent video, Wall Street Journal reporter Thomas Di Fonzo highlighted the problem when he attempted to buy a Domino's pizza for bitcoin — and ended up paying $US76.16, including $US9.47 in fees.
"I feel like I've been taken to the cleaners," he said.
---
RBA governor Philip Lowe also weighed in this week in a speech to the Australian Payment Summit. "In reality these currencies are not being commonly used for everyday payments and, as things currently stand, it is hard to see that changing," Mr Lowe said.
"The value of bitcoin is very volatile, the number of payments that can currently be handled is very low, there are governance problems, the transaction cost involved in making a payment with bitcoin is very high and the estimates of the electricity used in the process of mining the coins are staggering."
BITCOIN as an alternative to regular currency
hello subbing in.
i own bitcoin and etherium.
this is gonna be the next big thing of the century, however it will take 10-20 years before the coders find solutions to some of its problems, just like all new tech. In short term anything can happen, crash , correction, anything.
i own bitcoin and etherium.
this is gonna be the next big thing of the century, however it will take 10-20 years before the coders find solutions to some of its problems, just like all new tech. In short term anything can happen, crash , correction, anything.
It wont, it will certainly crash at some point. in fact in the history of bitcoin it has already crashed twice.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:40 pmRecent asian crashes have had a huge impact on 'ordinary' people. The number of shrewd investors is tiny compared to the number of gamblers who have jumped on a trend, that's one reason the price has got so high. These bubbles aren't new, but because it's all cool sounding and 'digital' people forget that.
Since 1925 there have been approx 30+ bubbles, ALL of which have burst. Can anyone who's keen on bitcon explain how this bubble is different to any of the others ?
Other crashes
amazon dotcom bubble
nasdaq crash
USD 19000Zenyatta wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:32 amGone over $US 14,000.
Mad. Absolutely no point in using it as a currency when the price is all over the show, so basically the only rationale for it would be as a store of value. But does this really make sense? It could be argued that the real value is in the underlying technology (the blockchain) rather than the currency, but the trouble is the same technology can be duplicated by hundreds (no thousands!) of other competing cryptocurrencies.
The bottom line is that Bitcoin is worth nothing. You'd be nuts to buy any of it. As to gambling to make a quick buck, I think sports betting is a far better bet (not to mention much quicker and more fun).
All currencies are worth nothing after the brettonwood system ended. What makes 1 more preferable to others is whether that financial system has integrity and whether the people have faith in it. Right now we have 1 system that is centralized, controlled by unelected central bankers, printed to create debt, unlimited supply, where you have to put your faith and trust in men, and one where the men appointed to look after your money can actually just grab it as they wish.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/deposit-gr ... ro-crisis/
And you have another system that doesnt require your faith in any men, where you are in charge of your own money, decentralized, limited supply, controlled by no one, censorship resistance.
All this will not appeal to most people now and i understand that. Just wait till the next financial crash and we'll see whos the real bubble.
-
northbound
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:22 pm
-
Copenhagen trader
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:15 pm
Meanwhile in Denmark it is only possible to bet on the Sportsbook when it comes to bitcoin.
I have been tweeting and phoning Betfair for a week now. Yet no answer. When I click on the link to the market you posted Euler I only get a dead link.
So as a trader here, I can only bet against Betfair on a hyped cryptocurrency with no underlying fundamentals. Might as well play Christmas bingo
So a better play has to be found somewhere else.
Thanks for a very solid video yesterday, Euler. Nvidia was my original thought as well. Though it has been hammering upwards lately it is oddly down with 9% the last month (Friday close).
I have been tweeting and phoning Betfair for a week now. Yet no answer. When I click on the link to the market you posted Euler I only get a dead link.
So as a trader here, I can only bet against Betfair on a hyped cryptocurrency with no underlying fundamentals. Might as well play Christmas bingo
So a better play has to be found somewhere else.
Thanks for a very solid video yesterday, Euler. Nvidia was my original thought as well. Though it has been hammering upwards lately it is oddly down with 9% the last month (Friday close).
-
steven1976
- Posts: 1744
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 6:28 am
Its got to be boiler room heaven at the moment.Euler wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:23 pmI more or less agree with Jordan Belfort
https://twitter.com/questCNN/status/940363458805039104
Most coins will fail, but there has to be one or two long-term winners - but which ones?
Ripple and Ethereum look like they have the best long-term prospects. Both have institutional support , superior technology, and roles beyond just currency. In the case of Ether, it's a token to apps on the blockchain, and Ripple is being used by major banks.
My guess is that Bitcoin crashes down to some minimum value below $US 2 000 and gradually fades away after that.
Ripple and Ethereum look like they have the best long-term prospects. Both have institutional support , superior technology, and roles beyond just currency. In the case of Ether, it's a token to apps on the blockchain, and Ripple is being used by major banks.
My guess is that Bitcoin crashes down to some minimum value below $US 2 000 and gradually fades away after that.
On my round of reading this morning I found this nice summary: -
The delusion of Bitcoin
“We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first”
– Charles Mackay
With regard to Bitcoin, my view is that the Blockchain algorithm itself is brilliant. Bitcoin itself, however, is just one application of Blockchain, and a rather awkward one. It’s not unique, meaning that other competing “cryptocurrencies” can be established just as easily. It’s not fiat, meaning that no country requires it to be used as legal tender. But beyond anything else, its inefficiency is so mind-boggling that the continued operation of the Bitcoin network could plausibly contribute to global warming. So be careful to distinguish Blockchain from Bitcoin. The Blockchain algorithm will undoubtedly become a useful component of validating transactions, tracking supply chain movements, and all sorts of other applications, but Bitcoin itself is likely to become the same thing to cryptocurrencies as Visicalc was to spreadsheets, or if you’re younger, what MySpace was to social networking.
Bitcoin essentially uses a decentralized network of computers (anyone can join) that “listen” for transactions that are broadcast over the network. Each computer can accept and attempt to validate any “block” of transactions, which is done by discovering a particular “hash” for those transactions. The hash is a long string of ones and zeros corresponding to the input, and has to satisfy the current level of “difficulty” (specifically, a certain number of leading zeros). The difficulty is set so that only one block of transactions is validated every 10 minutes or so, across the entire network. The maximum size of a Bitcoin transaction block is 1MB, which is about 2000 transactions. That’s the total number of Bitcoin transactions that can be processed worldwide in any 10-minute interval.
When you’re trying to validate a block of transactions, an extra transaction is included which designates a reward to your own account if you’re successful. Whoever discovers a hash that validates their block gets a reward, in Bitcoin. That’s what “mining” means. The validated block is added to the Blockchain – essentially a running ledger of every transaction ever made. The header for the next block has to contain the hash of the previously validated block (which is what creates the block “chain”).
But here’s the thing. Every time a block is validated, a single node in the network gets a reward, and everyone else’s computing time is completely wasted. Those required computations already absorb the same amount of energy as the entire country of Denmark. Some people will get mad at that statement, arguing that it may only be half of Denmark. Ok. Ireland, along with more than 150 other countries. We can wait a few months to include Denmark.
So ultimately, the Bitcoin features a combination of breathtaking inefficiency and constrained scalability. The system already features a rather steep cost per transaction, and hardly any of those transactions are for the purchase of goods and services. I’ve regularly observed that the value of a currency is essentially the present value of the stream of “services” that the currency can be expected to deliver over time, either by serving as a means of payment or as a store of value. That depends greatly on the willingness of other individuals to hold it and accept it into the indefinite future. My sense is that, as with all speculative bubbles, buyers are conflating “rising price” with “store of value.” Meanwhile, there’s little evidence to suggest that Bitcoin will ever be an efficient means of payment for ordinary goods and services.
Episodes of speculation can persist for some time, so there may be some speculative profit potential in Bitcoin yet. Looking over the very long-term, it may also be worth something in the future, because value is always ascribed to things that have some combination of scarcity and usefulness. To the extent that Bitcoin is assured to have a limited supply, and is undoubtedly being used for money-laundering already, I doubt that the future value of Bitcoin will be identically zero, assuming governments refrain from any regulatory effort. There will likely be numerous alternative cryptocurrencies launched in the future, each one constructed to first enrich its originator with a large number of units, and then released in the hope that it will catch on. In evaluating these alternatives, efficiency and scalability will be worth considering.
The delusion of Bitcoin
“We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first”
– Charles Mackay
With regard to Bitcoin, my view is that the Blockchain algorithm itself is brilliant. Bitcoin itself, however, is just one application of Blockchain, and a rather awkward one. It’s not unique, meaning that other competing “cryptocurrencies” can be established just as easily. It’s not fiat, meaning that no country requires it to be used as legal tender. But beyond anything else, its inefficiency is so mind-boggling that the continued operation of the Bitcoin network could plausibly contribute to global warming. So be careful to distinguish Blockchain from Bitcoin. The Blockchain algorithm will undoubtedly become a useful component of validating transactions, tracking supply chain movements, and all sorts of other applications, but Bitcoin itself is likely to become the same thing to cryptocurrencies as Visicalc was to spreadsheets, or if you’re younger, what MySpace was to social networking.
Bitcoin essentially uses a decentralized network of computers (anyone can join) that “listen” for transactions that are broadcast over the network. Each computer can accept and attempt to validate any “block” of transactions, which is done by discovering a particular “hash” for those transactions. The hash is a long string of ones and zeros corresponding to the input, and has to satisfy the current level of “difficulty” (specifically, a certain number of leading zeros). The difficulty is set so that only one block of transactions is validated every 10 minutes or so, across the entire network. The maximum size of a Bitcoin transaction block is 1MB, which is about 2000 transactions. That’s the total number of Bitcoin transactions that can be processed worldwide in any 10-minute interval.
When you’re trying to validate a block of transactions, an extra transaction is included which designates a reward to your own account if you’re successful. Whoever discovers a hash that validates their block gets a reward, in Bitcoin. That’s what “mining” means. The validated block is added to the Blockchain – essentially a running ledger of every transaction ever made. The header for the next block has to contain the hash of the previously validated block (which is what creates the block “chain”).
But here’s the thing. Every time a block is validated, a single node in the network gets a reward, and everyone else’s computing time is completely wasted. Those required computations already absorb the same amount of energy as the entire country of Denmark. Some people will get mad at that statement, arguing that it may only be half of Denmark. Ok. Ireland, along with more than 150 other countries. We can wait a few months to include Denmark.
So ultimately, the Bitcoin features a combination of breathtaking inefficiency and constrained scalability. The system already features a rather steep cost per transaction, and hardly any of those transactions are for the purchase of goods and services. I’ve regularly observed that the value of a currency is essentially the present value of the stream of “services” that the currency can be expected to deliver over time, either by serving as a means of payment or as a store of value. That depends greatly on the willingness of other individuals to hold it and accept it into the indefinite future. My sense is that, as with all speculative bubbles, buyers are conflating “rising price” with “store of value.” Meanwhile, there’s little evidence to suggest that Bitcoin will ever be an efficient means of payment for ordinary goods and services.
Episodes of speculation can persist for some time, so there may be some speculative profit potential in Bitcoin yet. Looking over the very long-term, it may also be worth something in the future, because value is always ascribed to things that have some combination of scarcity and usefulness. To the extent that Bitcoin is assured to have a limited supply, and is undoubtedly being used for money-laundering already, I doubt that the future value of Bitcoin will be identically zero, assuming governments refrain from any regulatory effort. There will likely be numerous alternative cryptocurrencies launched in the future, each one constructed to first enrich its originator with a large number of units, and then released in the hope that it will catch on. In evaluating these alternatives, efficiency and scalability will be worth considering.
Yes this is a bang on analysis. I think I speak for most people in the crypto space who have been here for over a year that we are somewhat perplexed at the incredible price rise occuring at the point in btc's history when it is more clearly failing in its aspirations that ever before.Euler wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:43 amOn my round of reading this morning I found this nice summary: -
The delusion of Bitcoin
“We find that whole communities suddenly fix their minds upon one object, and go mad in its pursuit; that millions of people become simultaneously impressed with one delusion, and run after it, till their attention is caught by some new folly more captivating than the first”
– Charles Mackay
With regard to Bitcoin, my view is that the Blockchain algorithm itself is brilliant. Bitcoin itself, however, is just one application of Blockchain, and a rather awkward one.. etc
In July we couldnt get beyond 3k a coin because bitcoin core team couldn't solve the scailing issue. They failed to solve the scailing issue, the transaction times and costs are now ludicrous and bitcoin cash forked off causing a bitcoin civil war. Yet somehow all this means we are at circa 17k a coin. Any one who was using BTC for its underlying use case of currency has stoped using it, there are hundreds of better currency coins out there. Whenever I transfer between exchanges I never use btc and no one in with any knowledge in the space does. Many coins are already transitioning to proof of stake algorithms to cut out the energy wasteage associated with proof of work. My understanding is this only minimally impinges on decetralization. There are also many coins with various different solutions to scalling such as proof of stake, sharding, delegated proof of stake etc Instead of all of this being valued accordingly we have an asset bubble we are all having to deal with.
CRAAAAAASH..... 
And DOWN it plunges, falling faster than a plane in a nose-dive....passing 19K...18K....17K...16K...
https://www.coindesk.com/price/
The supply of fools finally ran dry.
And DOWN it plunges, falling faster than a plane in a nose-dive....passing 19K...18K....17K...16K...
https://www.coindesk.com/price/
The supply of fools finally ran dry.
I dont think it will be much more than a short term pull back/breather from almost hitting 20K, I think it will eventually push through with far higher still to come
Then again im not involved so haven't been following all the news details etc
Then again im not involved so haven't been following all the news details etc