- On one hand, you have the mining part where apparently only the big mining companies or the ones selling mining machines really earn money.
Mining requires mathematical work, and the best computers cost money so only well funded groups can really do it at any scale.
- On the other hand, you have people buying whatever bitcoin and waiting for its price to go as high as possible; what seems to be the case lately, but what might suddenly change for no good reason.
All economics is driven by supply and demand. Cryptocurrency, or more specifically blockchain is new way of doing transactions. The technology is sound, so there is an anticipated demand for a potentially disruptive technology to affect the trillions of dollars being transacted every day on finance markets.
Bitcoin is the first of many products to use this tech, and it is restricted in supply, hence there is market growth.
In an extreme scenario where the given currency completely collapses,
No guarantees. But you don't get high returns on safe products.
People can easily buy bitcoins, but cannot immediately convert them into a national currency
You can buy and sell equally easily just like any other financial transaction, and just like a bank there are fees associated with that.
So, it seems that, in order to earn something with bitcoins, you would need to buy a relevant amount of them, wait a relevant amount of time and hope that the prices will continue increasing. Something like stock trading, but with a much more limited public information regarding what is the expected evolution and virtually no regulation?
Pretty much how all investing works. Higher risks usually mean higher gains and losses. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are just another vehicle for doing what humans have been doing for centuries.
The main difference is that it is new and disruptive tech, so has a lot higher potential than say gold or stocks, hence the rapid growth curve.
Disruptive tech is disruptive. It could all end in tears or the early adopters will get rich. Only time will tell.
Wow, are people still beating the "peak oil" dead horse? There was this little thing called the shale revolution. It turned the USA from an energy importer into an energy exporter. Try updating your out of date scare tactics from 2005.
And this shale, it is infinite? Peak oil is a real thing, improved supply technology is merely pushing the time scale back a few years. At some point we will have to deal with it.
Paper tulips whose value is backed up by a few million soldiers and police. To paraphrase Uncle Joe Stalin - how many armored divisions does ETH have?
This is the point, being decentralised and virtual you don't need soldiers to protect it. If the US burns, the USD burns with it but ETH will still be there.
Actually it is an extremely appropriate thing to point out.
Only if you don't understand it. Disruptive technology is disruptive. Disruptive things behave differently to regular things, so you can't apply the disrupted model to the disruptive thing. Eg Try explaining the Internet in terms of faxes...
It is unlikely $10,000 is the new normal
1997 thought it unlikely that anyone would ever pay $1000 for a mobile phone
Stop applying outdated models to new things and it might make more sense.
Smokers doern't (sic) live as long. Morbidly obese people don't live as long. Peopel (sic) who live according to whatever teh (sic) healthy wisdomis (sic) live longer. There has to be raw monetary data, proving incontrovertably (sic) your assertion,
Those things you just said there are assertions. I look forward to your evidence...
Meanwhile my mother.. my father... my father in law... my step mother in law.
Meanwhile, my mother in law
We don't have to use anecdotes or personal opinion, we know exactly how much diseases cost society based on the entire population.
Let's stick with evidence based policy rather than what some guy on the Internet thinks huh?
That sounds like stupid to me. We all heard the same messages, some of us chose to pay any attention to them.
Real solutions won't come in the form of curtailing free speech or such namecalling.
Of course it will. Simple logic, look at the countries where smoking is reducing the most and just do that.
If you're going to always hold yourself back because of a predetermined ideology you will never succeed.
Besides that, how is this not a freedom of speech violation? I hate big tobacco as much as the next guy, but it was legal to make and sell cigarettes, and still is. How can the government force a company to actively advocate against itself?
Maybe read the court transcript, I'm sure they covered it there...
Ok, I'll give you that Musk is a tax soak. But unlike most tax soaks, he actually delivers some cool and useful things for the taxpayers dime. In this case, I'm willing to look the other way. When it comes to cutting waste of taxpayer funds, there are a lot of other candidates I'd cut before I got around to Musk.
This is very likely the case. Back at the start when it was worth shit I mined about a dozen BTC. Lost them when I reformatted my computer and didn't even remember until years later when it would have been worth over $1,000.
if you really tried to do it on a political basis you would end up with urban, democratic "island nations" surrounded by sparsely populated rural, republican areas.
The blockchain is like the internal combustion engined (ICE). Bitcoin is like a particular make and model of car that uses ICE technology.
Yeah we know how it works, but it's 1927 and some people are saying Ford is a scam. Ford is here until something else better takes it's place, and when that happens, investors will move with it.
Just hoping it will go away and screaming bubble is not a great strategy.
Why would anyone with finnancial difficulties be buying new?
And why is this story on Slashdot?
I'm actually looking at buying a motorhome for an extended holiday and am surprised how cheap they are. RVtrader.com literally has tens of thousand of these things on the market. If you can't afford one of those then start with a car or van and sleep there. I did it for a while, it sucked but it served a purpose and got me out of the situation I was in.
Good few people have made homes out of shipping containers. Of course, they cut holes for windows, add hinges so the steel can be shuttered, and many add wood or brick panels to the outside to give it a more architectural look.
The shipping container house thing is a gimmick. The bulk of the cost of building a house is the fittings (Joinery, taps, benchtops, electrical etc) and none of this changes with a shipping container, except you need more expensive bespoke fittings instead of the mass produced stuff because your space is so small. The only thing you save is the framework, which if you want a rust free newish container actually costs more than a timber frame.
They make for for cool hipster pics on Instagram, but don't fool yourself that they are more economic than traditional build materials.
I am aware of how speculative bubbles work, thanks. Try to get out before the bubble bursts.
We all know how bubbles work. What you lack is the ability to judge between a scam and something new and disruptive. Slashdot was full of smarty pants who derided the iPod and iPhone ("Less storage than a Nomad, and more expensive") How did that work out?
I get that a lot of people don't understand Blockchain, it is complicated for regular folks to grasp. But I work with banks and govt and they're all getting into it. The tech is sound and early adopters will reap the rewards. Don't hold your breath waiting for it to disappear.
Slashdot Mirror
- On one hand, you have the mining part where apparently only the big mining companies or the ones selling mining machines really earn money.
Mining requires mathematical work, and the best computers cost money so only well funded groups can really do it at any scale.
- On the other hand, you have people buying whatever bitcoin and waiting for its price to go as high as possible; what seems to be the case lately, but what might suddenly change for no good reason.
All economics is driven by supply and demand. Cryptocurrency, or more specifically blockchain is new way of doing transactions. The technology is sound, so there is an anticipated demand for a potentially disruptive technology to affect the trillions of dollars being transacted every day on finance markets.
Bitcoin is the first of many products to use this tech, and it is restricted in supply, hence there is market growth.
In an extreme scenario where the given currency completely collapses,
No guarantees. But you don't get high returns on safe products.
People can easily buy bitcoins, but cannot immediately convert them into a national currency
You can buy and sell equally easily just like any other financial transaction, and just like a bank there are fees associated with that.
So, it seems that, in order to earn something with bitcoins, you would need to buy a relevant amount of them, wait a relevant amount of time and hope that the prices will continue increasing. Something like stock trading, but with a much more limited public information regarding what is the expected evolution and virtually no regulation?
Pretty much how all investing works. Higher risks usually mean higher gains and losses. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are just another vehicle for doing what humans have been doing for centuries.
The main difference is that it is new and disruptive tech, so has a lot higher potential than say gold or stocks, hence the rapid growth curve.
Disruptive tech is disruptive. It could all end in tears or the early adopters will get rich. Only time will tell.
Peak Oil was just the scaremongering tactic of the day, one that didn't work to scare anyone
Peak oil is a problem statement that drove the solutions we now have. Or do you think stuff just happens by magic fairies?
Wow, are people still beating the "peak oil" dead horse? There was this little thing called the shale revolution. It turned the USA from an energy importer into an energy exporter. Try updating your out of date scare tactics from 2005.
And this shale, it is infinite? Peak oil is a real thing, improved supply technology is merely pushing the time scale back a few years. At some point we will have to deal with it.
When the revolution comes, bitcoin owners will be first against the wall.
Yeah we heard the same thing about the automobile, and the radio, and the TV...
>
Has anyone actually tried to get $10k for a BTC?
No. No-one has ever done it. Youtube was right, it almost always is...
Paper tulips whose value is backed up by a few million soldiers and police. To paraphrase Uncle Joe Stalin - how many armored divisions does ETH have?
This is the point, being decentralised and virtual you don't need soldiers to protect it. If the US burns, the USD burns with it but ETH will still be there.
Cash is still anonymous ...
BTC was never anonymous. That was a myth that seems to have gained legs from people who don't understand how a blockchain works.
So pretty much like working on any tunnel project or rural mine. It's not that bad actually.
Which explains why so many people are lining up to move into mining towns...
screaming bubble is not a great strategy.
Actually it is an extremely appropriate thing to point out.
Only if you don't understand it. Disruptive technology is disruptive. Disruptive things behave differently to regular things, so you can't apply the disrupted model to the disruptive thing. Eg Try explaining the Internet in terms of faxes...
It is unlikely $10,000 is the new normal
1997 thought it unlikely that anyone would ever pay $1000 for a mobile phone
Stop applying outdated models to new things and it might make more sense.
Show me the actual evidence.
You're the one making claims....
Smokers doern't (sic) live as long. Morbidly obese people don't live as long. Peopel (sic) who live according to whatever teh (sic) healthy wisdomis (sic) live longer. There has to be raw monetary data, proving incontrovertably (sic) your assertion,
Those things you just said there are assertions. I look forward to your evidence...
Take it or leave it. It's quite possible that I've given more evidence than you in the end.
Anecdotal evidence, which really counts for nothing.
Meanwhile my mother.. my father... my father in law... my step mother in law. Meanwhile, my mother in law
We don't have to use anecdotes or personal opinion, we know exactly how much diseases cost society based on the entire population.
Let's stick with evidence based policy rather than what some guy on the Internet thinks huh?
That sounds like stupid to me. We all heard the same messages, some of us chose to pay any attention to them.
Real solutions won't come in the form of curtailing free speech or such namecalling.
Of course it will. Simple logic, look at the countries where smoking is reducing the most and just do that.
If you're going to always hold yourself back because of a predetermined ideology you will never succeed.
Besides that, how is this not a freedom of speech violation? I hate big tobacco as much as the next guy, but it was legal to make and sell cigarettes, and still is. How can the government force a company to actively advocate against itself?
Maybe read the court transcript, I'm sure they covered it there...
Ok, I'll give you that Musk is a tax soak. But unlike most tax soaks, he actually delivers some cool and useful things for the taxpayers dime. In this case, I'm willing to look the other way. When it comes to cutting waste of taxpayer funds, there are a lot of other candidates I'd cut before I got around to Musk.
*Looks at JSF program...*
Truck drivers never work in shifts? One sleeps while the other drives.
That sounds like an awesome career, where do I sign up?
This is very likely the case. Back at the start when it was worth shit I mined about a dozen BTC. Lost them when I reformatted my computer and didn't even remember until years later when it would have been worth over $1,000.
$120,000 today...
if you really tried to do it on a political basis you would end up with urban, democratic "island nations" surrounded by sparsely populated rural, republican areas.
And?
I'm not seeing how this is a bad thing?
but they'd be a lot less expensive.
But resale would be shit so TCO would be higher...
The blockchain is like the internal combustion engined (ICE). Bitcoin is like a particular make and model of car that uses ICE technology.
Yeah we know how it works, but it's 1927 and some people are saying Ford is a scam. Ford is here until something else better takes it's place, and when that happens, investors will move with it.
Just hoping it will go away and screaming bubble is not a great strategy.
Why would anyone with finnancial difficulties be buying new?
And why is this story on Slashdot?
I'm actually looking at buying a motorhome for an extended holiday and am surprised how cheap they are. RVtrader.com literally has tens of thousand of these things on the market. If you can't afford one of those then start with a car or van and sleep there. I did it for a while, it sucked but it served a purpose and got me out of the situation I was in.
Good few people have made homes out of shipping containers. Of course, they cut holes for windows, add hinges so the steel can be shuttered, and many add wood or brick panels to the outside to give it a more architectural look.
The shipping container house thing is a gimmick. The bulk of the cost of building a house is the fittings (Joinery, taps, benchtops, electrical etc) and none of this changes with a shipping container, except you need more expensive bespoke fittings instead of the mass produced stuff because your space is so small. The only thing you save is the framework, which if you want a rust free newish container actually costs more than a timber frame.
They make for for cool hipster pics on Instagram, but don't fool yourself that they are more economic than traditional build materials.
but at least I have the option of using Bing or DuckDuckGo.
No you don't. I tried going Google free and couldn't do it. Bing and DDG are absolute shit by comparison
Google's dominance is not a true monopoly.
Not by the definition of mono meaning one. But is effectively a monopoly since any competition (for search) is unusable by comparison.
but at least I have the option of using Bing or DuckDuckGo.
No you don't. I trred going Google free and couldn't do it. Bing and DDG are absolute shit by comparison Google's dominance is not a true monopoly.
Not by the definition of mono meaning one. But is effectively a monopoly since any competition (for search) is unusable by comparison.
I am aware of how speculative bubbles work, thanks. Try to get out before the bubble bursts.
We all know how bubbles work. What you lack is the ability to judge between a scam and something new and disruptive. Slashdot was full of smarty pants who derided the iPod and iPhone ("Less storage than a Nomad, and more expensive") How did that work out?
I get that a lot of people don't understand Blockchain, it is complicated for regular folks to grasp. But I work with banks and govt and they're all getting into it. The tech is sound and early adopters will reap the rewards. Don't hold your breath waiting for it to disappear.