Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Cryptocurrencies
kierny writes "Today, Bitcoin, tomorrow, the dollar? Former Central Intelligence Agency CTO Gus Hunt says governments will learn from today's crypto currencies and use them to fashion future government-protected monetary systems. But along the way, expect first-movers such as Bitcoin to fall, in a repeat of the fate of AltaVista, Napster, and other early innovators. But the prospect of fashioning a better, more stable crypto currency system — and the likelihood that Bitcoin may one day burn — is good news for anyone who cares about crypto currencies, as well as the future and reliability of our monetary systems."
Tell me again how crypto-currencies being "future government-protected monetary systems" is good news?
Its not so bad as long as you can keep the fear from your mind.
Except iTunes 1.0 didn't come out until the same year Napster was shut down.
I didn't support iPod's until after Napster was gone too. (probably because iPod's didn't exist then)
so:
Napster -> iTunes, Bitcoins -> something that doesn't exist yet, not Dogecoin. Dogs don't need currency.
iCoins are the new thing. Apple is releasing them next week. You need an iPhone to use them. All iTunes transactions will require iCoins. You also can only buy them in $1000 USD increments.
What we've learned so far from Bitcoin:
AltaVista was merely one search engine in a pool of many.. Yahoo, Hotbot, and Lycos were all around at the time and they did not all fail.
Napster only failed because the government/court system took them down. If it weren't for Napster being forced to close up its business, there were no indications that people were leaving it. Napster was a disruption in the industry and major players moved in unison to take it down.
A direct contrast to this comparison is TCP/IP. Since the creating of TCP/IP, there have been numerous (arguably better) protocols. However, the whole Internet runs on TCP/IP and it does not look to be going away any time soon. Like most new technologies, I would guess that the first virtual currency to be widely adopted would be the virtual currency that becomes the standard. Any new currency has a huge uphill battle in trying to become more mainstream than Bitcoin at this point.
Bitcoin is designed so that governments or other entities cannot take it down. The fact that governments, corporations, or single powerful individuals cannot control it is a feature - not a flaw. Gus Hunt, along with every other powerful well-established individual, would naturally be against the adoption of Bitcoin. But, saying to expect it to fail looks more like wishful thinking on their part.
--- We need more Ron Paul!
Every time I see/hear someone mention "[X] has no value!" I feel like I have to remind them of the subjectivity of value. Robert Heinlein, I feel, provided the best interpretation:
"Value" has no meaning other than in relationship to living beings. The value of a thing is always relative to a particular person, is completely personal and different in quantity for each living human—"market value" is a fiction, merely a rough guess at the average of personal values, all of which must be quantitatively different or trade would be impossible. [...] This very personal relationship, "value", has two factors for a human being: first, what he can do with a thing, its use to him and second, what he must do to get it, its cost to him."i/>
-Lt. Col. Jean V. Dubois (Ret.), pp. 93-94 [Starship Troopers]
I take mild offense to the OP insinuating that Napster "fell". It didn't fall, it was torn down by the claws of the RIAA who didn't have the foresight to even recognize this would be the future of media distribution.
A year spent in artificial intelligence is enough to make one believe in God.
> anything traded is 'currency'..
No, something generally accepted in the market as an intermediary is a currency. Direct trade (some of my stack of lumber for a dinner) is called "barter". Barter has the difficulty called "a coincidence of wants". You need people who both want what the other person has to trade. A currency simplifies this difficulty, in that I can trade my lumber for currency, then later find someone making dinner, and trade my currency for that. I don't have to find someone who wants my lumber AND is making dinner.
For a currency to be useful as an intermediary, enough people have to accept it in trade. In theory, anything at all can become a currency, but in reality only a few items become the currency of a given community because of the network effect. Whatever is most used tends to get used even more. Which items gain early acceptance depends on their features: inherent usefulness, durability, portability, fungibility, divisibility, scarcity, and others. Fish are useful, but not very durable or portable. Cattle are also useful, and reasonably durable, and portable because they are self-mobile, and in fact cattle were used as an early currency. But they are not fungible (not all identical units), and not very divisible until you eat them, so other kinds of currency with better features replaced them. Sand meets many of the features of a currency, except scarcity - there's not much point in trading for your sand, when I can go get my own. Gold is better in that respect - it's not easy to go get your own, so if you want some, it's easier to trade for it.
Gold is useful (you can attract women with it), and has all the other features except divisibility for small amounts, and portability for large amounts, so for a long time it was the best currency.
very few built the bit coin mining network. it was all just hackers throwing cpu power at it. however it is to the point where it is no longer cost effective to throw CPU power at it as the # of coins you get is worth less than the power to run them.
The problem of bit coin isn't whether or not it is useful but of it breaking down.
There are 44 quadrillion potential bit coins(21 million to the 8th power), but at the rate at which they are being permanently lost is just as staggering. every time someone loses 1 coin due to a lost password, bad hard drive etc, you really lose 8 potential coins. Real world currencies don't have to deal with "bit rot" (pun unintentional) You lose the combo to a physical vault there are other ways of opening it. even if the physical cash is destroyed you can always print more to replace.
Once a bit coin is gone. it is gone forever. Lastly we are already having to do transactions in milibits. what do we call .0000001 of a bit coin? Bit coin value has to go up in order to compensate for the inflation of number of coins and % of coins . however that means today's laptop at 1 BTC is worth .5 BTC tomorrow. People are already getting annoyed by such things. Purchase a product for 1 bit coin and two months later that one bit coin is worth 10 times what it was. Bitcoin might be a transactional currency, but it won't ever be a stable one. it's very design prevents such a situation from lasting more than a couple of years.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.