Coinbase Is Opening the First Regulated Bitcoin Exchange in the U.S | Hacker News Reader

Coinbase Is Opening the First Regulated Bitcoin Exchange in the U.S

techcrunch.com

71 pointswalter7117 comments

Ben Horowitz predicted on 11/19/14 that Bitcoin is going to be one (of two) of the next massive disruptors in technology. He compares Bitcoin with the revolutionary impact of the internet.

It is gaining momentum.

http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3369

As much as I wish Bitcoin would go away, I suspect that when the US has its first currency crisis, Bitcoin will find its long term footing. It has advantages over lots of other alternatives which are either not easily converted (gold, silver, etc) or subject to shenanigans (like JPY or Euro).

Seems unthinkable now, but I suspect this can't be more than 5 years out. I'm happy that the price has been coming down so I will be able to accumulate some at a more reasonable level. (I am still waiting, of course).

US had already plenty of currency crises. The most recent one is 2008 when there was a real risk of ATM withdrawals blocked and only HUGE amounts of bailout money kept that circus afloat. Another big one was in 1971 when Nixon basically showed a finger to everyone who trusted that USG would redeem USD for gold. Overall, since invention of Fed, dollar lost like 97% of its purchasing power (meaning, all that purchasing power was relocated to those who are friends with the Fed).

97% of people's savings were taken over the course of 20th century and spent for wars, inefficient social programs and private commercial enterprises. Bitcoin is all about opening eyes to that shenanigan and not allowing it to happen again.

If Bitcoin would ever threaten the Dollar, rest assured that it will be declared illegal.

It would not threaten the dollar. In the best (worst) case it would become the new value backing of the dollar (i.e. "What could I get for this dollar?" "Well how many bitcoins can I buy with it?"). It could become this gradually and without any cooperation of governments or banks at all.

Of course, declaring it illegal would throw a pretty big wrench in that process, even though in theory Bitcoin is not really affected by government regulation.

It's not much different than any given foreign currency wrt a local currency. In the U.S. it's not much different than using Euros, Pounds or CAD. Or for that matter holding stocks in a given company.

It's not legal currency for paying a dept or the government itself, but barter is legal. The implications are regarding hiding income and resources from the government. Also, exchanges as a business are highly regulated in general, which is the point of this, that they are operating an exchange legally...

During a currency crisis, the government in question usually becomes unable to sell bonds at any price. During the 2008 crisis, people were paying the US government to hold their dollars (bond rates were negative).

If the dollar collapses and takes the US government with it, there isn't going to be any electricity to use to operate bitcoin (at least not in the US). People that do have electricity probably won't trade it for fairy dust.

All power plants will disappear overnight in a currency crisis? I was not aware of this unusual phenomenon.

You have missed his point. He is saying that the US dollar is so robust that a "currency crisis" could only occur due to events that are globally devastating to basic infrastructure (nuclear war or what have you).

I don't necessarily agree with this, but that was the argument, not that a currency crisis alone would bring down the power grid.

No, I wasn't being that subtle. Just that if the dollar fell, so would the government, at which point who really knows how things would go.

"Overall, since invention of Fed, dollar lost like 97% of its purchasing power (meaning, all that purchasing power was relocated to those who are friends with the Fed)."

Please open a book and learn how compounding works. There are no "shenanigans" here, rather, widespread consensus that 2% inflation year on year is quite healthy, in spite of your disingenuous attempt to overdramatize it.

In spite of your angry post, I'm going to be civil. Because we as humans deserve it.

The "widespread consensus" isn't that "2% annual inflation" is healthy.

It is that it is the best way to increase GDP because it encourages people to invest rather than sit on funds. If we didn't have inflation, it wouldn't be an automatic tax (or mandatory enlistment) for the poor to trust their savings to the stock market. It wouldn't inflate the stock market above their actual value and cause additional risky investments and otherwise poor investments by the masses who wouldn't HAVE TO be a part of the system otherwise.

It isn't "healthy" for everyone. It certainly isn't healthy for people who have to take out money when the system is way down... Get over your anger issues. This isn't reddit. :)

Yes, things we so much better in the 20th century before the Fed existed. A glorious time when President Ayn Rand enacted a flat tax. No currency crises ever occurred, no wars were fought and no social programs stole our money to give away to poor people.

"As much as I wish Bitcoin would go away"

But why? I don't understand why Bitcoin generates negative feelings in so many people instead of just indifference.

Enjoy the ride :)

http://www.gifmania.us/Animated-Gifs-Objects/Free-Animations...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com