Hacker News Reader

Comment by TylerE | Hacker News Reader

That's what the btc crowd has said every time it bubbles

How about you guys go 12 months without losing 25%+ of value in a single day before you start talking about being "here to stay".

View on HN

Again if you're looking at BTC as e-gold you're missing the point.

The value is the txn network and that isn't going away. Price volatility is irrelevant to the long term value of it as a transaction vector of last resort for a huge number of applications.

I would not have so much confidence in a system that, in your own words, is a last resort.

Last resort on a global scale is still a gigantic market.

The significant rise of the value of Bitcoin despite its volatility, for the last 4 years, has proven that the market doesn't care that much about volatility. Bitcoin is being adopted and growing regardless.

Bitcoins bought with US dollars last year buy over 40x more than if the dollars had been saved. Bitcoin is here to stay for as long as the internet is.

If I had a Bitcoin for every dotcom company that saw a >40x YoY increase in market cap that hasn't stayed around as long as the internet...

And yet I doubt any of these saw 40x YoY increases topping out at a $2.5 billion valuation.

Webvan got to something like $1.5b Broadcast.com sold to Yahoo for $5.7b

> Broadcast.com sold to Yahoo for $5.7b

Smells like success, not failure.

Not really. Basically everything that was Broadcast.com was shutdown within 8 years. So they basically paid $5b+ to run a service that lost money every year for a few years until they finally just quietly dissolved it.

I mean, the broadcast.com guys made out like bandits, the buyers, not so much.

That's what he's saying. This is the new con and the cons are going to make out like bandits.

I'd say it is here to stay:

http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg360ztgTzm1g10zm2g...

That looks very similar to this one: http://www.ecotao.com/holism/add/enron/Enron_whole.jpg

If you look at it up to about end-of-year 2000.

The difference though is that Enron insiders were engaging in immoral and illegal activities. Bitcoin on the other hand is provably not a scam; it is an existing and backed commodity.

Market manipulation as an insider is impossible, as there are no insiders; manipulation is only possible by attacking infrastructure or accumulating enough BTC.

Future bubbles and crashes are likely, but I predict it's going to continue to bounce back pretty much forever. Only if many major governments began to criminalize it, or if some new somehow "better" cryptocurrency came out, would it be in risk of complete deflation.

It's not backed[1], and it's not a commodity. It's a collection of bytes that has value because a small minority of them are being accepted in exchange for real products, and at present a much larger number of speculators are willing to bet on more people wanting them in future. And as you've pointed out yourself, there are two very obvious and likely future scenarios in which it would become very difficult to buy anything with BTC.

[1]The "mining" is a clever hack against crashes in that it makes speculators reluctant to divest their BTC holdings for less than they've spent acquiring the BTC. But if you can't reliably convert the BTC back to GPU time (assuming you actually wanted it) it's still intrinsically worthless.

Really? What happens when the founders who mined hundreds of thousands of coins in the early days cash out?

Go look at the top 250 addresses, a _majority_ of them have never been spent from. There isn't any conclusive proof that the #1 address (111,111 BTC) belongs to DPR, but it is clearly linked to SR in one way or another. I'd be willing to bet a solid amount of my own holdings that those coins are effectively "dead" (private key lost) along with a good portion of the rest of the addresses that haven't been touched since 2011, or have flat out never been spent from.

Everyone is touting the 12 million number for total coins in circulation right now and 21 million as the maximum amount. In practice both of those numbers are going to be significantly lower.

> There isn't any conclusive proof that the #1 address (111,111 BTC) belongs to DPR, but it is clearly linked to SR in one way or another.

It's been linked to Ross/altoid's Bitcointalk posts, and has a sum consistent with the first year of SR commissions. That's all as conclusive evidence as anyone needs for it.

So what happens when you remove 1% of the currency from the market in a single day?

It hasn't been removed yet. The DPR story has just started - the password-crackers could turn in success any day, or Ross could decide that he'd like to cut a decade off his near life sentence. All we can say is that it's currently not on the market, which is exactly what we could say before the SR bust.

"I apologize, Goldfinger. It's an inspired deal!"

Because the people who were prescient enough to figure out that there was immense unrealised demand for such a system are surely anxious to offload their now increasingly valuable stake in that system, right?

I sure am, back when I was mining and buying at around the 1$ mark I thought to myself; self, you know this is all just games and popcorn, but there'll always be a bigger sucker out there and some day they'll come along and buy all this stuff you're now building, so suck it up and tolerate the jet engine whine of the fans, you'll be rich in the long run.

Not really, though.

Your fears are unfounded.

2 million coins were sold in the last 30 days: http://bitcoinity.org/markets/list?currency=ALL&span=30d and yet the price rose from $130 to $200... So a few extra "hundreds of thousands" of coins being sold would not have been able to significantly decrease the exchange rate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com