Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Bitcoin Plummets Under $6,000 To a New Low For the Year (cnbc.com)

Posted by msmash on from the meanwhile-in-crypto-world dept.

Bitcoin's moment of relative stability ended abruptly Wednesday. The world's largest cryptocurrency hit its lowest level of the year, falling as much as 9 percent to a low of $5,640.36, according to CoinDesk. From a report: Bitcoin had been trading comfortably around the $6,400 range for the majority of the fall, a stark contrast from its volatile trading year. Other cryptocurrencies fared even worse on Wednesday. Ether fell as much as 13 percent while XRP, the third largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, dropped 15 percent, according to CoinMarketCap.com. The rout is likely being spurred by uncertainty around bitcoin cash, according to founder and CEO of BKCM, Brian Kelly.

132 comments

  1. Funny bitcoin names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Buttcoins
    Dunning krugerrand
    Autism kroners
    Currency of the future

    1. Re:Funny bitcoin names by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dunning krugerrand

      This one's my favorite.

      The hard limit on Bitcoin money supply will be the temperature at which ASICs melt.

  2. They thought they were being clever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When they were being tards.

    1. Re: They thought they were being clever by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Ironically, chopping the first syllable off of "retard" qualifies as well.

    2. Re: They thought they were being clever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ironically, using ironically makes you one as well.

    3. Re: They thought they were being clever by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      That's all you've got??

    4. Re: They thought they were being clever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I've only got 46 chromosomes, only special people like yourself have an extra one.

  3. Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the price so high for so long, I've not bought any new BTC. If it keeps going down, maybe it'll finally feel decent to buy more.

    1. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes keep buying.

    2. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 2

      Why? It has 5 years (at best) before quantum computing destroys it. The post-quantum algorithms require ENORMOUS signature sizes that can't be mitigated with a lightning-network style hack, and would have to be adopted years in advance such that everyone holding any BTC could transition their account over. The math adds up to about 4-8TB/yr every single wallet holder has to maintain just to verify the blockchain (or convert the whole thing into a centralized system where you just trust what is effectively a bank to verify transactions for you - it loses the whole "decentralized' appeal as a result.) That's to say nothing of the cost of transaction sizes when it costs you a minimum of 31KB just to sign a transaction. Lots of accounts won't even be able to pay to convert to the post-quantum protocols, and in turn you'll end up with a massive quantity of missing/lost BTCs siphoned up by whoever possess the first quantum computer capable of running Shor's algorithm (the ensuing scandal from which will likely yield regulations effectively making BTC centralization get taken over by existing banks anyway.)

    3. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by mark-t · · Score: 2

      I think it will be a lot more than 5 years before the absolutely massive amount of cooling to near absolute zero required for quantum computing to work will be within practical reach of the average consumer.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    4. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would invest more in toilet paper than bitcoin, at least you can wipe your ass with it.

      Do something that creates value if you want to make money. Plant a bunch of apple trees and sell them, congratulations, you've created value to the world with a nutritious snack. Bitcoin? Not so much.

    5. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to be practical for everyone, it only takes one person to use a quantum computer in the span of a day to drain every single unconverted bitcoin account.

    6. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Nidi62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just want graphics cards to be reasonably priced again

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    7. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      It has 5 years (at best) before quantum computing destroys it.

      You are severely overestimating both the rate of advancement in quantum computing. I give it around 15 years.

      Realistically, Bitcoin will probably be functionally extinct for other reasons before then. Presumably replaced by something that doesn't use so much damn power.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    8. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It doesn't need to be within reach of everyone. The first practical quantum computers will belong to to universities, governments, and large corporations - but eventually someone is going to start renting processor time on one to anyone who can pay. Probably Amazon.

    9. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's the worlds most obvious pump and dump scheme, geez.

      Bitcoin has no value, none, zip, nada. There is no physical backing material (eg actual gold, which has industrial uses, not just jewelry) so there is never anything that can be cashed out. Whoever holds all the bit coins in the end is the one who was stupid enough to buy them in the first place.

      Bitcoin has some measure of usefulness if, and only if, it's used as an intermediary with no conversion fees. However that hasn't been the case since BTC was worth $100. It's so overvalued right now, that hanging on to it is foolish. Unless you paid for any of it in the low hundreds, I'd suggest just getting out of it before it crashes back down. There is no floor it will hit, as there is nothing to support it's value at any value.

      Even actual stocks and commodities have a floor value that can be hit by dropping below the NPV of the backing source, with stocks this is the actual equity in the value of the property, machinery, etc. With commodities, this is the physical retail value that can be had for the materials. However even many stocks no longer own the properties of their businesses they sit in, and such their entire value is held up by their sales figures. One massive fuckup and that company is wiped out. See PG&E in California, if it's found that they caused the campfire fire, that company's value goes negative. I'm fairly certain that they do not own enough generating assets and transmission equipment to sell to recover the costs of all the lawsuits. They lost 30% of their value when the insurance company said, "nope, not happening."

      Bitcoin has the same problem, there is nothing backing it's value, so the minute people realize that and get out, it's value rapidly heads towards zero.

    10. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      You are severely overestimating both the rate of advancement in quantum computing. I give it around 15 years.

      Nope, just taking growth in qubits-per-machine over the last 5 years. They're roughly following Moore's law at this point, are already in the hundreds of qubits range, and it only takes ~1,100 qubits to run Shor's algorithm.

    11. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      Five years from now, people will have likely been forced to learn the difference between fiat currency [backed by governments with militaries] and fiat currency backed by not a fucking thing except expensive utility bills.

    12. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I think you are still overestimating how far QC will be along in 5 years...

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    13. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      It's followed Moore's law for nearly the last decade with no signs of letting up. Only takes 1,100 qubits to run Shor's algorithm and destroy all pre-quantum cryptographic algorithms and we're already in the few-hundred of qubit range. 2 more doublings (approximately 3 years following trends over the last 8 years) and it's here. 5 years is being extraordinarily conservative in my estimate.

    14. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      You are nuts. We aren't even close to a few-hundred qubit range. I dub thee "QC Nut" and you are in the same basket is the "AI" and Space Nutters.

    15. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >There is no physical backing material

      The utility bills that represent the wasted electricity and ruined environment?

    16. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

      1,100 bits, assuming that error correction is not necessary. Which, as it happens, it is. Badly so. When this is taken into account, two orders of magnitude more qubits will be necessary. Quantum computing powerful enough to apply Shor to nontrivial cases is way further into the future than 5 years. In fact, it remains to be seen whether the error correction requirements for such instances are feasible with our current technology, or any technology in the foreseeable future.

    17. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be of the mistaken impression that there is no fundamental behind bitcoin; golds value is dependent on the cost of mining, refining, supply/demand, etc., bitcoin doesn't grow on trees...

    18. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      D-Wave is already making them commercially at that scale, with wide enough use that papers are being written from tests on it https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.459...

    19. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      This is just wrong.

    20. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what a rigorous argument. Just what I've come to expect from /.

    21. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So of no value, much like your comment.

      I guess I would be bitter too if I had missed out too.

    22. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up! Some of us haven't unloaded our BTC yet!

    23. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One massive fuckup and that company is wiped out. See PG&E in California, if it's found that they caused the campfire fire, that company's value goes negative.

      Interesting: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/business/energy-environment/california-fire-utilities.html

      I'm not sure why the ratepayers will have to pay off the liability of PG&E though. Seems like it should be forced into bankruptcy, the assets sold off and the ratepayers deal with the new company not the old. Jail the execs and hold them personally liable if you need to send a message. Seems silly to let the one thing that isn't "free market" be sticking debts on people who had nothing to do with the operation of the company.

    24. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Now's your time. There's a lot of graphics cards on the second hand market. Heck the other day I found a listing from someone selling 20 used 1080s, though admittedly he wasn't entertaining unit sales.

    25. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have links to papers that aren't only on arxiv? Just because a paper is written doesn't mean the paper is worth a damn, and arxiv just stores any paper, regardless of merit. There was famously an article in there "proving" that java was faster at disk access than C where the author didn't realize the java he was using was using buffered IO.

    26. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NicknameUnavailable, you're wrong. And it makes me sad to only see replies that are even more wrong...

      Even a powerful quantum computer would not break bitcoin in the way that you describe. Most hashing algorithms are not broken under quantum computing (sha-256 and thus bitcoin is safe), and bitcoin only stores the hash of the public key for each address. So it is only possible to hack addresses that you have seen as an input (either on the blockchain or mempool). By default, bitcoin addresses are only used once, and this means that everyone will have time to convert to post-quantum when it suits them best. Even after everyone has a quantum computer in their pocket.
      One other thing is the mining, quantum computers can't break hash algorithms, but the are slightly more efficient in mining. But this will only mean that quantum miners will out-compete the current asic miners by some factor. (Still quite a problem if having 1 quantum computer will give you the mining capacity of all asic owners combined.) Bitcoin's difficulty scaling algorithm can cope with this, as long as no 51% attack occurs.

      Anyway: Bitcoin will definitely have to change to cope with quantum computing, if it miraculously survives the next 5 years (I actually think usable quantum computer may be online even sooner than that.). But your assumption that every non-converted wallet is up for grabs, is wrong. Your other point, that post-quantum signatures are enormous, isn't really relevant at this moment... Bitcoin doesn't support those, and if/when such a thing may be implemented, assumptions about how bitcoin currently work don't really make sense (Even while I agree that the way signatures are stored on the blockchain isn't very likely to change).

    27. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      D-wave is a complete scam. They are just regular digital computers. No wonder you think that.

    28. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      It's a paper about experiments done on a commercial machine, just freaking look up D-wave.

    29. Re:Finally, I might be able to buy again... by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      D-wave is a complete scam. They are just regular digital computers. No wonder you think that.

      Lol, no they aren't.

    30. Re: Finally, I might be able to buy again... by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      I second that motion. I refuse to even look or consider a new build on principle. Bitcoin and the like need to hurry up and finally die, we all know it is coming, so just die already!

  4. When it gets down to a nickel..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still won't buy one.

    1. Re: When it gets down to a nickel..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who gives a flying shit what you do, I'm fucking rich because I don't listen to people like you.

    2. Re: When it gets down to a nickel..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were that fucking rich, you'd be getting your own photo spread on Vanity Fair, not posting AC to some site that actual rich people never heard of and wouldn't care about if they did.

  5. Fadcoin by Zorro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Next bubble will be Pokemon Futures.

    1. Re:Fadcoin by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      I'd actually buy some of those.

    2. Re: Fadcoin by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you probably would.

    3. Re: Fadcoin by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      If I can fork over $2 for your mom then squirtle is a no-brainer.

    4. Re:Fadcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if (idiot)
      while (hype)
      buy()
      wend

      while (doommongering)
      sell()
      wend
      else
      hoddle()
      fi

    5. Re:Fadcoin by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Next bubble will be Pokemon Futures.

      Gotta Mine Them All!

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  6. surprise by guygo · · Score: 1

    people begin to not believe in hugely hyped vaporware currency. what a surprise... not.

    1. Re:surprise by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      people begin to not believe in hugely hyped vaporware currency. what a surprise... not.

      Even at $6000- that's a huge mark up in value for someone who, say, got in 2 years ago. Few people would have done so well in the stock market. For those people who bought in at close to $20k- yeah... sucks to be them.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  7. And stay down by xack · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I like my planet cool and not roasted for monopoly money.

  8. Almost fixed by Moof123 · · Score: 2

    Just a few more dozen forks and it will be there, right?

    1. Re:Almost fixed by sheramil · · Score: 1

      Jabbed into the right eye sockets, yes.

  9. Sold my house and bought at $19K by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was told that this time it was different and the average joe would win :(

  10. I'm buying the dips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next stop: the moon

    Bitcoin is the future. There's no brakes on this train.

    Gonna keep on stacking.

  11. Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run ups by perpenso · · Score: 1

    This is not surprising. After several previous exponential runs in the past we have had 75% drops and plateauing for years after the drop. Dropping from $20K'ish to $5K'ish is consistent with this pattern.

    Of course there is one very different thing this time. In the past three occurrences we had ownership by techie speculators. Now we have a ton of wall street and ordinary person speculators. Be interesting to see how they react, if they have the long term faith most techie speculators had.

  12. I'm in! by martinX · · Score: 1

    I'm in! All I have to do is sell my tulip futures an I'll be ready to buy some cheap, cheap bitcoin!

    --
    When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    1. Re:I'm in! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I am holding put options on tulips.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:I'm in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will totally sell you tulips next summer for a bitcoin today.

    3. Re:I'm in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in! All I have to do is sell my tulip futures an I'll be ready to buy some cheap, cheap bitcoin!

      why does everyone think this clever?... it was funny _maybe_ the first 100,000 times.... now its just pathetic.

    4. Re:I'm in! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, you are wrong. It is funny every time.

  13. My name is Zach and I'm here to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does your hatred for ZIP have to do with the price of Bitcoin?

    Nothing. He's just a loon with no self control.

    ZIP

    P.S. => he's trying to make up for his lack of coding skills with misinformation and lies about old discussions and false claims. Repeating lies doesn't make them into facts. Every one of his posts burns any respect people might have had for APK.

    1. Re:My name is Zach and I'm here to say... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What respect?

  14. The Properties of Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Infographic: The Properties of Money

    Uses of Money
    - Medium of Exchange
    - Unit of Account
    - Store of Value

    Properties of Money
    - Acceptable: People must be able to use it for transactions
    - Divisible: Can be subdivided into smaller units
    - Durable: Must withstand repeated use
    - Fungible: One unit is interchangeable with another
    - Portable: Can be carried around and transferred to others
    - Supply Limit: Supply in circulation keeps value relatively constant
    - Uniform: The same denomination must have the same purchasing power

    Does Bitcoin meet all of these?

    1. Re:The Properties of Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can tell you the US dollar doesn't.

  15. Re:Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run u by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    This is not surprising. After several previous exponential runs in the past we have had 75% drops and plateauing for years after the drop. Dropping from $20K'ish to $5K'ish is consistent with this pattern.

    No True Downturn.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  16. Holders on suicide watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know what inspired the fad on r/bitcoin that holding bitcoin was a good idea. This is a volatile asset that can lose its entire value overnight. It makes much more sense to sell at dips.

    1. Re: Holders on suicide watch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People wanting to make money off of suckers.

  17. Good by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    May it continue to sink and (hopefully) sink fast!

    1. Re:Good by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      May it continue to sink and (hopefully) sink fast!

      As long as Bitcoin is valued above zero, it is experiencing a bubble inconsistent with the fundamentals of reality.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get someone to explain what a currency is.

    3. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you mean "fiat currency", it's a means a value transfer that is backed by the government, and refusal to accept it for debts will land you in prison. Also, you're required to use it to pay your taxes. And since what basically amounts to a lot of lead with little explosive charges is what backs that fiat currency, it's just easier to use it for everything rather than just for debts and taxes.

      Bitcoin on the other hand has nothing backing it.

    4. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A currency is a piece of paper (or increasingly, a number in a database) that has value assigned to it - and worst of all, that value is a debt and the people in charge can print more whenever they feel like it.

      There are lots of ways to criticise bitcoin... but those claiming it has no value (unlike "normal" currency) are idiot. Pure and simple.

  18. Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

    The bitcoin network is based on software. The software can be updated to change algorithms and keys and underlying strategies (PoW v PoS), etc as necessary.

    1. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point entirely. The update required has to happen right the fuck now for everyone to get converted over before the first quantum computers capable of cracking it are available. It has to be initiated from every single wallet holder individually and it equates to every single wallet holder needing to accumulate 4-8 TB worth of signatures for every single year of operation. By the time the first quantum computers happen that's a 16-32TB blockchain every single user of bitcoin must have themselves, or the entire system becomes consolidated to the point banks can easily strongarm regulations to gain control over it. Everyone claiming bitcoin can survive the post-quantum cryptography era (in a few years, this isn't some far future thing) is either ignorant of the technical details of the system or an outright scammer.

    2. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying Bitcoin, and Bitcoin alone will be wiped out by this currently non-existent future tech? that seems like a lot of assumptions right there.

    3. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

      Using bitcoin does not require that you run a full node with all blockchain data.

      For those wanting a full node, when quantum computers are here, 32TB of data a year will likely be not a big deal.

      Quantum computers in a few years, yep, those flying cars in our driveways too.

    4. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      There are no cryptocurrencies immune to this.

    5. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      The point is cryptocurrencies have a singular selling point: they are distributed. The practical considerations of quantum computers ensure that even if switched to post quantum algorithms, they become centralized. Projecting quantum computers that can run Shor's algorithm by 2023 is not even a remote stretch, they could be here as soon as 2020 given current trends projected from the last several years of development. The only real constraint is that they need to hit about 1,100 qubits in a system, and current quantum computers are already in the hundreds growing at a pace equivalent to Moore's law.

    6. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by sjames · · Score: 1

      Post quantum doesn't mean you need a quantum computer to run it.

    7. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      No, it means you need an absurd amount of storage when you use those algorithms in a blockchain because post-quantum signature algorithms produce enormous signatures. About 31KB per transaction, and you can't just apply some lightning-network style hack to get around that because it is based on individual wallet holders, so both for wallet holders and every single transaction they make you need to stick another 31KB on the blockchain to keep it secure. Look at the number of transactions and it becomes obvious why this destroys the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies: you effectively need a full blown server for every user, a datacenter-per-user after a decade.

    8. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

      The point is cryptocurrencies have a singular selling point: they are distributed.

      Not every user needs to be a full node. You merely need *enough* nodes with *enough* diversity.

      The practical considerations of quantum computers ensure that even if switched to post quantum algorithms, they become centralized.

      Centralization, now were are getting into the politics of crypto not the technical details. With *enough* diversity we can still have security but perhaps not political purity.

    9. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Not every user needs to be a full node. You merely need *enough* nodes with *enough* diversity.

      To be distributed, yeah they do. What you're describing is no different from the modern banking system, only slower.

      Centralization, now were are getting into the politics of crypto not the technical details. With *enough* diversity we can still have security but perhaps not political purity.

      That's the whole point, cryptocurrencies only have the one selling point: distributed architecture. You can achieve everything else they offer (and in fact, it already exists) with the modern banking system.

    10. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

      No, "distributed" is not the only selling point. No, banking can not achieve everything crypto can. For example I can transfer money globally, including exchange from one fiat to another, with lower fees and possibly faster access to the transferred funds.

    11. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      No, "distributed" is not the only selling point. No, banking can not achieve everything crypto can. For example I can transfer money globally, including exchange from one fiat to another, with lower fees and possibly faster access to the transferred funds.

      They achieved that with the ACH systems in the 70's. Distributed architecture is the ONLY advantage cryptocurrencies have. As soon as it becomes centralized you'll see higher fees just like with existing ACH systems. The cheap transaction cost is a result of the distributed nature (lots of people competing to drive down the rate efficiently,) not some magical feature of cryptocurrencies.

    12. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

      No, ACH has significant longer delays / confirmation times for ordinary people, 72-hour, 24-hour.

      Again, you confuse completely decentralized and decentralized *enough*. Not everyone needs the full data set, only *enough* people.

    13. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      ACH is instantaneous, there are delays in the implementation level because banks had automated processes that only upload things daily in the past. That justification has allowed them to pass off the idea that it's not instant because the multi-day delay allows them to stack transactions from highest to lowest and charge extra overdraft fees in a manner that they can get away with. There's issues with banking systems due to corruption, not technology. The issues due to corruption will be the same if not worse when Bitcoin gets centralization because people are greedy, the people running Bitcoin exchanges are far from moral saints and they have a much higher rate of fucking customers than banks do.

    14. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by perpenso · · Score: 1

      The reason for the ACH delays is irrelevant, the fact remains that they exist.

    15. Re:Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessary by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      It's not irrelevant when they are a byproduct of corruption, you're arguing from the standpoint of technological superiority which doesn't exist, and everyone who has run the centralized components you are in favor of are even more corrupt than those running the system you're arguing against.

  19. Not Bitcoin Cash by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most likely BCH has nothing to do with this crash - it has anemic trading and exchange volumes vs. Bitcoin/Ethereum/Ripple and this altcoin alone couldn't have caused the crash. The truth is very few know what really happened but they remain silent. This might be tangentially related but only tangentially. Another possibility is that someone(s) has dumped a lot of crypto-currency on to the market and there's only enough money to keep the exchange rate.

  20. Re:Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run u by perpenso · · Score: 1

    This is not surprising. After several previous exponential runs in the past we have had 75% drops and plateauing for years after the drop. Dropping from $20K'ish to $5K'ish is consistent with this pattern.

    No True Downturn.

    I'm leaning towards the wall street and average person speculators not changing the downside very much, but limiting the upside a whole lot. In other words plateauing at $4-5K for a year a two, possibly. Having another 65x run up in a matter of months, very unlikely ever again.

  21. Re:Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run u by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I'm leaning towards the wall street and average person speculators not changing the downside very much, but limiting the upside a whole lot. In other words plateauing at $4-5K for a year a two, possibly.

    People said the same thing when it was at $10k.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  22. No uncertainty about BCH by mysidia · · Score: 1

    The rout is likely being spurred by uncertainty around bitcoin cash

    There's really no uncertainty; just some folks deluding themselves..... Bitcoin cash is a failed hard fork that was dead on arrival,
    and such a small portion of the crypto market there's no way this is a likely explanation.

    Prices are volatile.... less buying interest more selling interest in BTC, simple as that.

    1. Re:No uncertainty about BCH by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Bitcoin was the first successful cryptocurrency, if not the first cryptocurrency entirely - and like many things in tech, the first one has staying power even though the technology is inferior to products that try and fail to displace it. Bitcoin is running into scaling and resource use issues.

    2. Re:No uncertainty about BCH by ctilsie242 · · Score: 2

      Chaum's DigiCash was the first "widespread" cryptocurrency. It is primitive by today's standards, but hell... there wasn't even AES out then, and the best out was maybe MD4 for hashes and at best, triple DES for encryption. Keys might be 384 to 512 bit RSA if that.

      The currency is well designed, especially with the anonymity built in.

    3. Re:No uncertainty about BCH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Bitcoin was the first successful cryptocurrency

      Bitcoin has degenerated to the point where it is no longer being used for the purpose for which it was designed.

      Doesn't sound like success to me.

    4. Re:No uncertainty about BCH by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Bitcoin is running into scaling and resource use issues.

      The Bitcoin blockchain has SegWit and the Lightning Network technology addressing the scaling issues.

      BCH ultimately doesn't fix the scaling issues; BCH has security issues since SegWit was not introduced transaction
      malleability was never fixed and the Covert ASICBoost bug in the PoW algorithm was never fixed, and BCH requires
      greater resource consumption on the chain than BTC transactions using second layer scaling with Lightning wallets.

      As far as THIS hard fork is concerned.... BCH SV makes the resource problem even worse for BCH by
      increasing blocksize again to 128 MB; whereas BCH ABC would maintain the status quo for BCH ---- still less scaleable than
      BTC or what the BCH proponents like to call the Bitcoin Core chain.

  23. prease2engrish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no, he never gained any respect because of a severe lack of ability to communicate in the english language. his posts are _grokparsefailures.

  24. Re:Zach Patterson / ZIP "Greatest Hits" (lol, not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    shhh.

  25. I'm not worried. Just a stock market correction. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everything has its market corrections. Apple's stock is bombproof, and only going up. In fact, the stock market by itself is only increasing with no major losses since 2008, assuming someone didn't panic sell.

    BTC is the same way. Now is the time to buy, because there are only so many coins out there, no matter how many miners there are, so it is an increasingly scarce resource. Plus, even the plebe on the street understands and respects Bitcoin as a holding of value. China has dumped billions into the currency, so has Venezuela.

    tl;dr... Bitcoin ain't going nowhere. The Lightning Network is pretty much 100% secure, and allowing for transactions without having to wait for blockchain space.

  26. Re:Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run u by perpenso · · Score: 1

    I'm leaning towards the wall street and average person speculators not changing the downside very much, but limiting the upside a whole lot. In other words plateauing at $4-5K for a year a two, possibly. Having another 65x run up in a matter of months, very unlikely ever again

    People said the same thing when it was at $10k.

    Not me. I was aware of the previous 75% drops and have expected a return to the current levels. The point I'm try to make is that the downside may be similar to past downsides but I doubt the upsides will ever be comparable. The demographics of the holders have changed too much, there will likely be much more, and saner level of, cashing out any gains. $5K, $4K, $3K bottoms - 75%, 80% and 85% drops, I don't think any of those levels will have much different level of cashing out.

  27. hate btc and all, love drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if crypto does finally die that would be best for everyone, but how would i then buy sheets of acid safely? genuine question.

    1. Re: hate btc and all, love drugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old fashion way. Using custom card readers and hacked CCs, with drop locations.

  28. I love the idea, but ... by MpVpRb · · Score: 1

    A currency, free of government control, supported by solid crypto, sounds ideal
    But, a real currency needs to be used frequently and commonly in legitimate, business
    Unfortunately, the main uses of bitcoin seem to be speculation, fraud and the purchase of black market stuff

  29. Re: Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    10TB drives are cheap right now.

  30. The crypto junkies I know sold recently by lamer01 · · Score: 2

    They were staunch supporters. What that tells me is that the ones that jumped in to speculate and get huge gains are tired of waiting and just getting out. I expect that the real support is around $500. That's the level it was at before the speculators jumped in. $500 is where it is useful for the underground economy.

    1. Re:The crypto junkies I know sold recently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love how you can just make up a number and claim that's the proper point where it's useful.
      Even at a million dollars a coin one 'satoshi' would only be worth a cent. The price of the coin has no effect on where "it is useful for the underground economy"

  31. Re: I'm not worried. Just a stock market correcti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LUL.

  32. You Suffer by Napalm Death by SonicSpike · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin sure is volatile today!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    Libertas in infinitum
  33. Re:Not a surprise - 75% drops after past exp run u by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

    People said the same thing when it was at $10k.

    The sucker train has ended. Unless space aliens start buying Bitcoin, this ride is over.

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  34. Re: Bitcoin is software, it can change as necessar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    QC, cold fusion, AI, and flying cars are all just a decade away... and will remain so indefinitely.

  35. Time to switch to selling "real estate"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe crypto"currency" sellers/shills would like to switch to selling/promoting "land" from Minecraft next? :-)

  36. What good is bitcoin? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    So far, it has proved to be good for money laundering and for speculation. What else?

    1. Re:What good is bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Free money.

      While the energy cost for mining is higher then what you get out of it there is nothing that says that you are the one who has to pay.
      Some javascript ads mine bitcoins in the background of millions of browsers.
      They users pay $10 for the energy and you get $1 worth of bitcoins.

    2. Re:What good is bitcoin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Money laundering? No. That's what XMR is for, silly.

  37. Re: Zach Patterson / ZIP "Greatest Hits" (lol, not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Show some respect. This is APK we're talking about. He has saved many with his software. If he wants to post here, let him.

    Be glad that you can read his thoughts.

    Praise the day when you can hear from APK!

    ALL HAIL APK

  38. Digital currency is here to stay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ripple is backed by banks, and it is being used by them currently at a global level to transfer money between banks... that is a solid digital currency. Bitcoin is great for the blackmarkets, that is not going away anytime soon as you still need a digital untraceable currency that works like cash (that is not going away anytime soon)... sure the price was crazy at 18K, but for it to be used at a ~$500 to ~$1500 value per coin makes it a really attractive alternative to gold. I don't know much on Ether, but it just seems like a copy of bitcoin.

    What other reliable options do you have... WoW gold? These digital currencies make a lot of sense in a global scale.

  39. Re:I'm not worried. Just a stock market correction by Bryan+Ischo · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin is intrinsincally unfit for its intended purpose. The cost of validating transactions within the network, while based on really cool ideas, just doesn't scale. It is fundamentally limited to a handful of transactions per second, which is absolutely insufficient for the global monetary system it purports to be.

    I thought bitcoin was super cool when I read the whitepaper in 2012, aside from a few fatal flaws, it is a thing of beauty. But I recognized its inherent flaws and so I could not get excited by it.

    The lightning network is a similar joke. It requires that anyone who wants to participate pair up with the person they want to transact with and sequester bitcoin for the duration of the "lightning" transactions. Thus you have to pay a bitcoin transaction fee (not sure how much that is at the moment, but it has gotten into the tens of dollars per transaction in the past) for every partner that you want to participate with, and you have to limit the number of people you can partner with to the amount of bitcoin you have to sequester for this purpose. And you have to watch the bitcoin network *constantly* because you have no idea if and when the other party may terminate the relationship via another bitcoin transaction.

    Supposedly with lightning you can chain in other parties but that also increases the number of transactions you have to be watching for on the bitcoin network. Essentially you become even more tightly bound to the data stream of the bitcoin network than you are when you just trade bitcoin.

    Whereas bitcoin is fundamentally unsuited for its purpose because of its inherent low transaction rate, lightning is fundamentally unsuited for its purpose because its network requirements grow exponentially (for participating parties who have to be constantly vigilant to watch for on-blockchain transactions that could affect their lightning balances).

    Also the lightning whitepaper has big handwavy "we haven't figured this part out yet" gaps (at least it did when I read it like 8 months ago). It is also so complex that it's hard to find confidence that there aren't loopholes, either in its design or in any software that would be written to implement it (unlike bitcoin which was at least itself simple enough that just about anyone familiar with programming and cryptography could easily validate its design and implementation).

    The only thing giving bitcoin significant perceived 'value' is the greedy impulse of buyers looking to get rich quick. Lots of people definitely can conspire, either intentionally (bitcoin price manipulation, definitely a thing), or unintentionally (whims of the market) to place 'value' on something like bitcoin, but it's not something I personally want to be involved with. The early bitcoin forums were filled with the most disgusting collection of get-rich-quick schemers and I have no doubt that it isn't 1,000 times worse now that there is actual real money in it. Not to mention the unsavory underworld criminals you will be in bed with (remember those price manipulators) when you trade in bitcoin.

  40. History eludes to the cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the last 2 years there was a drop right before Thanksgiving, just like this year.
    Perhaps people are cashing out some BC for fiat to buy Holiday gifts?

    You know, Occams Razor.

  41. Registered /.ers make you EAT YOUR WORDS ZIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017

    Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016

    his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015

    his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015

    I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015

    that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015

    I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017

    * Want more "ZIP"? Ask - & "ye shall receive"!

    (+ me EXPOSING your fuckups https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... )

    APK

    P.S.=> I've DOZENS of registered /.ers liking/using/praising my work & 100,000++ users - YOU have ZERO

  42. ZIP = "better programmer" (lol, not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You said it ZIP: Where's your work everyone can see/use? It's not. It's HOTAIRWARE/NOTWARE (lol) "I'm a much better programmer than APK" - by Anonymous Coward ZIP on Monday October 08, 2018 @11:27PM (#57449082) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    The BETTER PROGRAMMER w/ no programs, lol - @ least you can say your "code" has NO BUGS - of course, it also does ZERO (like you) since it does nothing @ all, lol!

    You hotair BLOWHARD talker, lol!

    You f'd up ZIP https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    Yet 100,000++ users of my ware & dozens of even REGISTERED /.ers like/use/praise MY work https://news.slashdot.org/comm... vs. your HOTAIR talk punk!

    * LMAO!

    (Let's see how YOU take it when I publicly SHIT ALL OVER YOU by letting FACTS of YOUR FUCKUPS vs. ME https://science.slashdot.org/c... do the job for me)

    APK

    P.S.=> You STUPID & LAZY all talk chimpanzee - KEEP IMPERSONATING me - I'll expose your BLOWHARD INCOMPETENCE publicly, lol... apk

  43. Zach Patterson / ZIP "Greatest Hits" (lol, not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See how STUPID "ZIP" (Zach Patterson) the CHIMP is (tried to take credit for what I solved before him) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... (he needs to LEARN TO READ)!

    I even SHOW ways to do it YOURSELF https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... (he couldn't).

    Delphi/FreePascal/ObjectPascal HAS no issue w/ null-term'd string bufferoverflows - C does, C++ can UNLESS you do what I said 1st loser.

    Tell us about CODE SIGNING (which has been STOLEN & ABUSED) https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... MY METHOD CAN'T BE (upmodded +2 INTERESTING in CODING FOR DEFCON no less) https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    "I'm a much better programmer than APK" - by Anonymous Coward ZIP on Monday October 08, 2018 @11:27PM (#57449082) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    BIG TALK - Yet ZIP has nothing to show in programs. I can https://news.slashdot.org/comm... from registered /.ers liking/using/praising my work (& 100k users worldwide too). He can't.

    LIAR ZIP says he has no account "I don't have an account, so I don't have mod points" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

    Yet LIAR ZIP says he downmods my posts (IMPOSSIBLE MINUS AN ACCOUNT on /.): "I down-modded a few of your post on other threads" - by Anonymous Coward "ZIP" on Thursday October 11, 2018 @11:31AM (#57461058) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    APK

    P.S.=> KEEP IMPERSONATING ME CHIMP - this comes out every time, lol!... apk