2) Just because its new doesn't mean its better or makes more sense than the existing methods.
2) Just because its new doesn't mean its better or makes more sense than the existing methods.
2) Agreed. There are no guarantees, however strong indicators it will improve. Remember e-commerce didn't make sense either back in the day (no salesperson, can't touch goods, security - all “rational” reasons) -- but all solved.
On that point I don't even view BTC as currency actually (my personal view).
It is first of it's kind with no precedent (is it currency, asset, ledger, protocol…?). Is it all of above? Or something else? Reminds me of when first iPad came out and people just viewed it as a “large iPhone” (true, in some ways - but it’s definitely not defined that way anymore. It’s own unique category now. Public aware of nuances). No precedent. Still defining by analogy to old paradigms.
BTC is similarly nuanced. I actually view it as more buying a stock in protocol. Yup sounds crazy/doesn't make sense using old paradigms. But I’ll leave that for another post (the gist of the idea is here: http://btcgeek.com/dawn-of-autonomous-corporations/).
Given that it's designed as a digital replacement for cash (not savings and checking accounts - cash), keeping more than a few hundred dollars around at a time would seem to be as advisable as storing the equivalent $100 bills, with the same level of extraordinary security measures needed.
2) What is a way that I can transfer value to somebody in a far away place that is easier (if both parties already accept coins) than bitcoin?
2) Is only easier if you ignore the process of getting bitcoins and the process of converting them to something else. If you do that then me sending you an email saying "IOU value" is easier.
2) If you had an easy way of converting that IOU into USD, or converting it into real goods (by, for instance buying something on newegg), then I would say that yeah, that would be just as good. In fact, that's a great analogy! Bitcoin is a very widely accepted system of IOUs (kindof like a banking system...or cash).
As far as I know, Coinbase has no insurance for their users' coins. If they go bankrupt, you'll lose all your money.
Coinbase is a startup. Failure is the norm, not the exception. Until they get insurance, you shouldn't store more than you're comfortable losing.
Since most consumers can't afford to lose very much, and since most consumers aren't comfortable using an offline storage solution like Armory, they'll need to stick with cash or credit to stay safe. This harms bitcoin adoption among consumers, because they don't have bitcoin on hand with which to buy things on a whim.
Hey thanks for the tip.
BTW, you shouldn't keep more cash in your wallet than you feel comfortable keeping in your wallet.
bitcoin is at a stage where it's not trivial to secure if you are not a technical person. There are companies that are working at making this easier by providing the security and even insuring the bitcoins if something happens. When services like this are out we will see a huge turning point IMO.
AFAIK there is only one company that has claimed the insurance angle(Xapo) and if you read the policy you basically need to have the person that stole them be arrested before they will pay out.