Bitcoin exchanges don't buy BTC. They just facilitate trade between two parties. One brings the BTC, the other brings the USD, agree on a price, and the exchange swaps their assets around.
it's completely failing as a currency. And, you know, it's going to fail as an investment vehicle too if it has no legitimate use.
Lightning Network should allow it to be used as a currency.
But even without use as currency, it can still be a good investment. Nobody uses gold as currency, but still they invest in it. It's still cheaper to send 1 BTC to the other side of the world as it is to send the equivalent in gold.
The problem is that most of us don't have that sort of money sitting around
1 Bitcoin is internally represented as 100 million basic units (the "Satoshi"). You can buy any number of Satoshis, so it's possible to buy 0.001 coins for instance.
Some multi-nationals from America and Europe are able to take advantage of the situation by opening branches in Japan and hiring very competent women at bargain salaries
So it is self-correcting. Just not always in the most predictable ways.
It also presupposes extra generating capacity to be available
Yes, but that's not a big deal. When you install plenty of wind and solar, you get the extra capacity included. Also, coal/nuclear base load generators can be operated more efficiently when they provide a constant amount of power. This means there will be excess capacity available at night.
Storage can also be implemented in the form of parked electric vehicles, for very little extra cost.
We should expect to see participation at around the same percentages as the population of the area.
Why should we expect that ? Do you think everybody has the same interests ?
Try a simple experiment. Go to youtube, and look up videos on "Arduino". Check the ratio of men and women. Now do the same for "Scrapbooking".
Nobody is stopping women from ordering an Arduino and recording a video, and nobody's stopping men from ordering some scrapbook supplies. The barrier to entry is extremely low in both cases. How come we still see this division ?
Simple: different interests. The average woman thinks Arduino is stupid, and the average man thinks scrapbooking is stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
But nobody's retiring on $1.95.
I'm amazed how you can get from "you can buy fraction of a bitcoin" to "but you can't retire on $1.95".
Bitcoin exchanges don't buy BTC. They just facilitate trade between two parties. One brings the BTC, the other brings the USD, agree on a price, and the exchange swaps their assets around.
We were discussing the minimum amount to buy.
it's completely failing as a currency. And, you know, it's going to fail as an investment vehicle too if it has no legitimate use.
Lightning Network should allow it to be used as a currency.
But even without use as currency, it can still be a good investment. Nobody uses gold as currency, but still they invest in it. It's still cheaper to send 1 BTC to the other side of the world as it is to send the equivalent in gold.
You could leave your bitcoin on the exchange to avoid the transaction fee.
If you have reason to believe Bitcoin won't survive, you shouldn't be holding it at all. Trying to time the peaks and crashes is just a fool's game.
Check again. It's around 15-16k now.
One cannot really use it for microtransactions
No, not if you want every transaction on-chain. The blockchain is an expensive resource.
You will be able to do microtransactions on the Lightning Network, where they will be done off-chain, and then only occasionally settled on the chain.
but even if the market drops 30%, you still own stock.
Stock prices have gone to zero before.
Please retake basic stock market classes.
Why ? Bitcoin is not a stock, and the Bitcoin exchanges don't function like stock markets.
Of course, it's going to pop. The question is at what price, and what happens after that. In 2013, it popped from $1300 to $200.
The problem is that most of us don't have that sort of money sitting around
1 Bitcoin is internally represented as 100 million basic units (the "Satoshi"). You can buy any number of Satoshis, so it's possible to buy 0.001 coins for instance.
How does one go about cashing in a bitcoin to collect said $17,000?
Someone gives you their wallet address. You transfer your bitcoin to that address, and they transfer the $17000 back to you.
Usually, this is done with an exchange as middle man, but the principle stays the same.
Good introduction:
https://www.youtube.com/result...
There is going to be more arable land in Greenland!
Bare rock. It's what plants crave.
Seems like the GP is talking about life experiences, which are not genetic
Life experiences do depend on gender
Some multi-nationals from America and Europe are able to take advantage of the situation by opening branches in Japan and hiring very competent women at bargain salaries
So it is self-correcting. Just not always in the most predictable ways.
It also presupposes extra generating capacity to be available
Yes, but that's not a big deal. When you install plenty of wind and solar, you get the extra capacity included. Also, coal/nuclear base load generators can be operated more efficiently when they provide a constant amount of power. This means there will be excess capacity available at night.
Storage can also be implemented in the form of parked electric vehicles, for very little extra cost.
Storage costs money to implement
Every other source of energy also costs money. Storage could very well be cheaper than alternatives.
The oil and coal industry hold significant patents on the devices that make competing energy systems viable.
Interesting. Do you have some of these patent numbers ?
Either way, 3 categories would be better: renewables, fossil and nuclear. Maybe even a 4th for storage.
To go be a problem you must not actually be excluding groups
What if I exclude groups of people who are stupid or boring ? Is that allowed ?
We should expect to see participation at around the same percentages as the population of the area.
Why should we expect that ? Do you think everybody has the same interests ?
Try a simple experiment. Go to youtube, and look up videos on "Arduino". Check the ratio of men and women. Now do the same for "Scrapbooking".
Nobody is stopping women from ordering an Arduino and recording a video, and nobody's stopping men from ordering some scrapbook supplies. The barrier to entry is extremely low in both cases. How come we still see this division ?
Simple: different interests. The average woman thinks Arduino is stupid, and the average man thinks scrapbooking is stupid.
If you haven't heard, software engineering has a diversity problem
There's unequal participation. That doesn't mean there's a problem.
Try withdrawing $1 billion from a bank account at any moment. Maybe that's not real money either.