# Lifestyles & Discussion > Bitcoin / Cryptocurrencies >  IS IT GAME OVER FOR BITCOIN?

## Smaulgld

*Does an 80% price drop spell the end of Bitcoin?*
https://smaulgld.com/is-it-game-over-for-bitcoin/

----------


## dannno

Considering it has happened several times already, and each time it recovered and made something like 2,000% gains, I'd say no..

----------


## Smaulgld

> Considering it has happened several times already, and each time it recovered and made something like 2,000% gains, I'd say no..


Correct that is covered

----------


## Zippyjuan

To grow, you need new buyers of bitcoin. (Does that sound like a pyramid scheme?)   The average person got interested when it headed to $20,000- and has since lost interest.  They are not likely coming back. No longer hip and too confusing and difficult to deal with.  So you have just the believers selling to each other. Then you have market dilution with all the new coins and tokens being released.  Want a measure of bitcoin price?  Check how popular it is on google trends.  That shows you the interest and it has pretty much followed the price up and down- both hit their highs in December 2017.  Search frequency is down 92% from its peak. Price is down 82%.  How do you bring back the general public? 

https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...=all&q=bitcoin

----------


## oyarde

I am  Long .

----------


## idiom

Its not over yet, we have a tonne of bots showing up to pump it, so there is at least enough money and energy for one more pump and dump.

----------


## Stratovarious

Best thing about Bitcoin it that it will help deliver the 'Cashless Society' , great for the
NWO, best thing since sliced bread.

----------


## harryjosh

Bitcoin is the most secure financial network in the world and still, bitcoin does not have a future as a currency. So, the future of bitcoinin my perspective is vague. 

The bitcoin price has struggled to break out of its long-running bear market so far this year, with investors and traders desperately trying to call a bottom to the tumbling market that's seen the value of bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies fall by more than $400 billion in a little over a year.

----------


## Mordan

5k...

lets see...

----------


## Smaulgld

> 5k...
> 
> lets see...


On its way higher!

----------


## timosman

> On its way higher!


Bitcoin will go up $1 every time you masturbate. Get busy.

----------


## dannno

> To grow, you need new buyers of bitcoin. (Does that sound like a pyramid scheme?)   The average person got interested when it headed to $20,000- and has since lost interest.  They are not likely coming back. No longer hip and too confusing and difficult to deal with.  So you have just the believers selling to each other. Then you have market dilution with all the new coins and tokens being released.  Want a measure of bitcoin price?  Check how popular it is on google trends.  That shows you the interest and it has pretty much followed the price up and down- both hit their highs in December 2017.  Search frequency is down 92% from its peak. Price is down 82%.  How do you bring back the general public? 
> 
> https://trends.google.com/trends/exp...=all&q=bitcoin



BTC volume is currently at an all-time high.

Price is $5136

----------


## Zippyjuan

> BTC *volume is currently at an all-time high.*
> 
> Price is $5136


Keep in mind that:  https://www.technologyreview.com/the...ke-apparently/




> *Nearly all Bitcoin trades are fake, apparently*
> 
> There have been suspicions for a while that the markets are overinflated. In fact, fears of market manipulation have held up regulatory approval for a number of proposed Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), frustrating many enthusiasts who believe that the eventual approval of ETFs will spur broader adoption of the technology by investors.
> 
> Now, in a twist, a company hoping to list an ETF has reported to US financial regulators that *around 95% of all Bitcoin trading volume has been faked by exchanges.*
> 
> Bitwise, a crypto-asset management firm, analyzed 81 exchanges, finding that 71 of them exhibited patterns that reflected artificial trading volume. One way to manufacture volume is via a technique called wash trading, in which someone simultaneously buys and sells the same asset. Although the exchanges in the study reported a combined $6 billion in daily volume during four days this month, Bitwise determined that only $273 million of it was real.
> 
> Bitwise’s global head of research, Matthew Hougan, told the Wall Street Journal that the point of submitting the analysis was to show regulators that “a real market for Bitcoin” still exists despite the storm of artificial trading. Solid evidence for this comes from the small number of exchanges that can actually verify that their trading data is real, he said. If approved, Bitwise’s fund would be based on the volume on those exchanges, which represents only around 5% of the generally reported total.
> ...

----------


## dannno

> Keep in mind that:  https://www.technologyreview.com/the...ke-apparently/


There is probably some truth to that, of course that comes from a group that is trying to push for a regulated ETF. Deligitimize exchanged to legitimize their own agenda. 

But I don't really see your point. Do you doubt that the legitimate volume is higher now than it ever has been?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> There is probably some truth to that, of course that comes from a group that is trying to push for a regulated ETF. Deligitimize exchanged to legitimize their own agenda. 
> 
> But I don't really see your point. Do you doubt that the legitimate volume is higher now than it ever has been?


If most of it is fake, it is hard to tell. Manipulators trying to make it seem more popular than it really is.

----------


## dannno

> If most of it is fake, it is hard to tell. Manipulators trying to make it seem more popular than it really is.


Ok, tell me again all about how bitcoin isn't popular when it's busting through its old highs.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Ok, tell me all about how bitcoin isn't popular when it's *busting through its old highs.*


Like it's $20,000 high?  Six months ago it was $6,500. One year ago it was about $8,000.

----------


## Zippyjuan

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1RE0JY

It may have been a single buyer driving the price up that much. 




> *Bitcoin jumps 20 percent, mystery order seen as catalyst*
> 
> LONDON (Reuters) - Bitcoin soared to its highest in almost five months on Tuesday, pulling smaller cryptocurrencies up with it, *after a major order by an anonymous buyer set off a frenzy of computer-driven trading, analysts said.*
> 
> The original cryptocurrency soared as much as 20 percent in Asian trading, breaking $5,000 for the first time since mid-November. By mid-afternoon, it had settled around $4,800, still up 16 percent in its biggest one-day gain since April last year.
> 
> Bitcoin surged to near $20,000 in late 2017, the peak of a bubble driven by retail investors. But last year prices collapsed by three-quarters, with trading dominated by smaller hedge funds and crypto-related firms.
> 
> Today’s gain *was probably triggered by an order worth about $100 million spread across U.S.-based exchanges* Coinbase and Kraken and Luxembourg’s Bitstamp, said Oliver von Landsberg-Sadie, chief executive of cryptocurrency firm BCB Group.
> ...

----------


## idiom

A single buyer just moved the market 26%. Wow. What a healthy and deep market. Definitely a store of value and not manipulated by whimsical pump and dumpers.

----------


## Mordan

> A single buyer just moved the market 26%. Wow. What a healthy and deep market. Definitely a store of value and not manipulated by whimsical pump and dumpers.


they told the same story when Bitcoin was 200USD in 2013.

Haters gonna hate and bitcoin is gonna keep doing bitcoin things.

its a new asset class

----------


## idiom

> they told the same story when Bitcoin was 200USD in 2013.
> 
> Haters gonna hate and bitcoin is gonna keep doing bitcoin things.
> 
> its a new asset class


Yep, the move from $200 to $20k was definitely not a pump n dump. You got me there.

----------


## Paul799

> *Does an 80% price drop spell the end of Bitcoin?*


No, because as long as something accomplishes a purpose, it will stay, no matter its price volatility.
Even if tomorrow the price of bananas collapse, that doesn't spell the end of bananas trading, because they taste delicious and everybody likes them.
Question is, what is, or could be, Bitcoin's purpose in our financial system, other than a means to gamble and make the proverbial quick buck

----------


## DilanShark

IMO There will be no game over for bitcoin.
I know that we can see the market is falling now.
But the moment that bitcoin wake-up people will gather again and tell BTC is the future.
BTC will get up and bounce back i am sure of that! Just learn a lot before you start. Read lots of crypto resources like cryptolinks

----------


## nikcers

In order for something to be considered a hard currency instead of a commodity it has to be backed by a commodity (the more history the commodity has the better) otherwise its just a commodity backed by demand. Therefore its as valueable as people think that it is, which means that as long as people think its worth something it is, and than its a beanie baby.

----------


## Mordan

> In order for something to be considered a hard currency instead of a commodity it has to be backed by a commodity.


Current mined Bitcoin in circulation are backed by energy/electricity burned to mine them.

energy is a commodity.

Bitcoin is a hard currency.

Now you may not understand the mining process and its novelty but even Ron Paul saw the light...

Your point does stand for all the POS coins like XRP, EOS, NANO though.

----------


## nikcers

> Current mined Bitcoin in circulation are backed by energy/electricity burned to mine them.
> 
> energy is a commodity.
> 
> Bitcoin is a hard currency.
> 
> Now you may not understand the mining process and its novelty but even Ron Paul saw the light...
> 
> Your point does stand for all the POS coins like XRP, EOS, NANO though.


Energy and electricity aren't manipulated LOL

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Current mined Bitcoin in circulation* are backed by energy/electricity* burned to mine them.
> 
> energy is a commodity.
> 
> Bitcoin is a hard currency.
> 
> Now you may not understand the mining process and its novelty but even Ron Paul saw the light...
> 
> Your point does stand for all the POS coins like XRP, EOS, NANO though.


So if I want to cash in my bitcoin, I can get electricity?

----------


## dannno

> So if I want to cash in my bitcoin, I can get electricity?


Yes, you can cash in your bitcoin and buy electricity, or equipment to generate electricity. Or you can get a cyrpto Visa card and pay your utility bill with bitcoin. Eventually utility companies will accept crypto without converting it to cash. But in the meantime, it is still seamless to do so.

But that isn't the point. The point is that the bitcoin payment network is what is valuable. It is cheaper and better than what we currently have as far as being able to transfer value over long distances without shipping costs, and wiring money without paying banking institutions. If it was more widespread there would be no question about which is the best option to use. So as bitcoin becomes more widespread, the value of the payment network increases. The payment network runs on electricity. Therefore bitcoin is backed by electricity. I know it might be a challenging concept for you. Maybe you could try taking some nutropics, which are like vitamins for your brain, and then about it really hard.

----------


## nikcers

> Yes, you can cash in your bitcoin and buy electricity, or equipment to generate electricity. Or you can get a cyrpto Visa card and pay your utility bill with bitcoin. Eventually utility companies will accept crypto without converting it to cash. But in the meantime, it is still seamless to do so.
> 
> But that isn't the point. The point is that the bitcoin payment network is what is valuable. It is cheaper and better than what we currently have as far as being able to transfer value over long distances without shipping costs, and wiring money without paying banking institutions. If it was more widespread there would be no question about which is the best option to use. So as bitcoin becomes more widespread, the value of the payment network increases. The payment network runs on electricity. Therefore bitcoin is backed by electricity. I know it might be a challenging concept for you. Maybe you could try taking some nutropics, which are like vitamins for your brain, and then about it really hard.


no you can't you can't cash out bitcoins, you can sell them, like selling a TV or selling a beanie baby. The bitcoin isn't defined by history or backed by a currency and worth a specific amount of currency.

----------


## dannno

> no you can't you can't cash out bitcoins, you can sell them, like selling a TV or selling a beanie baby. The bitcoin isn't defined by history or backed by a currency and worth a specific amount of currency.


Right now a bitcoin is worth over $8,500, and you can cash it out for that at a bitcoin exchange. I can't tell you what the price will be tomorrow. I can tell you that in 5 years it will likely be significantly higher than it is now.

----------


## nikcers

> Right now a bitcoin is worth over $8,500, and you can cash it out for that at a bitcoin exchange. I can't tell you what the price will be tomorrow. I can tell you that in 5 years it will likely be significantly higher than it is now.


That's why it will never be used like money. No one wants their money changing in value that much because it being manipulated. If you can't see the manipulation and pyramid scheme aspect of this than I recommend you try some more autism medicine.

----------


## dannno

> That's why it will never be used like money. No one wants their money changing in value that much because it being manipulated. If you can't see the manipulation and pyramid scheme aspect of this than I recommend you try some more autism medicne.


Nobody wants their money to increase in value? That doesn't make any sense..

You need to take an economics lesson. The dollar changes value every day. If you buy dollars with other currencies, or you look at the cost of goods that you buy and see how they are increasing, you can see it. Over time, the value of the dollar falls.. because it is being manipulated. Bitcoin is not manipulated, it is subject to market forces and it is tied to a set of open source code that anybody can read. The dollar is manipulated - it is subject to market forces, but the government manipulates the value by printing more at their whim.

----------


## nikcers

> Nobody wants their money to increase in value? That doesn't make any sense..
> 
> You need to take an economics lesson. The dollar changes value every day. If you buy dollars with other currencies, or you look at the cost of goods that you buy and see how they are increasing, you can see it. Over time, the value of the dollar falls.. because it is being manipulated. Bitcoin is not manipulated, it is subject to market forces and it is tied to a set of open source code that anybody can read. The dollar is manipulated - it is subject to market forces, but the government manipulates the value by printing more at their whim.


I get my economics from Ron Paul, when banks start buying up bit coins instead of gold I'll believe ya there, but you can't promise it will increase in value because its based on demand. This happened before and when governments cracked down on it the bitcoins crashed and people lost their life savings. I don't know anyone who has ever had that happen with Gold, when has gold crashed?

----------


## dannno

> I get my economics from Ron Paul, when banks start buying up bit coins instead of gold I'll believe ya there, but you can't promise it will increase in value because its based on demand. This happened before and when governments cracked down on it the bitcoins crashed and people lost their life savings. I don't know anyone who has ever had that happen with Gold, when has gold crashed?


Why would ANYBODY invest their life savings in bitcoin?? That is dumb. What would be even more dumb would have been to sell the bitcoin one bought with their life savings when it "crashed". I would never advise either of those things, neither does anybody who promotes bitcoin in any serious way. 

It's hard to say that bitcoin has ever really "crashed", though. Historically, it goes up and up, then goes up really high for a very short time and then comes down. But it always levels out at a level that is significantly higher than it was before it started going up. For me, it seems like a crash is more descriptive of something that goes up really high in value, then crashes back down somewhat near the value it started before going up significantly.  

I do recommend buying bitcoin to use and for speculative purposes, but I also recommend buying gold and silver. In fact, I would recommend having the bulk of your savings in gold and silver - with the exception of having a large holding of bitcoin that came from speculative buying when the value was much lower. I've put more $$ into gold and silver than I have bitcoin, but I have much bigger holding of bitcoin at the moment because that value increased so much. But I always take some of those profits and put it back into gold and silver. Eventually when it goes up again significantly, I will buy more gold and silver with my bitcoin.

----------


## nikcers

> Why would ANYBODY invest their life savings in bitcoin?? That is dumb. What would be even more dumb would have been to sell the bitcoin one bought with their life savings when it "crashed". I would never advise either of those things, neither does anybody who promotes bitcoin in any serious way. 
> 
> It's hard to say that bitcoin has ever really "crashed", though. Historically, it goes up and up, then goes up really high for a very short time and then comes down. But it always levels out at a level that is significantly higher than it was before it started going up. For me, it seems like a crash is more descriptive of something that goes up really high in value, then crashes back down somewhat near the value it started before going up significantly.  
> 
> I do recommend buying bitcoin to use and for speculative purposes, but I also recommend buying gold and silver. In fact, I would recommend having the bulk of your savings in gold and silver - with the exception of having a large holding of bitcoin that came from speculative buying when the value was much lower. I've put more $$ into gold and silver than I have bitcoin, but I have much bigger holding of bitcoin at the moment because that value increased so much. But I always take some of those profits and put it back into gold and silver. Eventually when it goes up again significantly, I will buy more gold and silver with my bitcoin.


Lots of people were getting sold on buying up bitcoins, I saw it all over reddit during the crash a few years ago when it went down like 10 grand. There were people buying it when it was up because they thought it would keep going up like it did. It was the main reason why it went up so much, because so many people were duped into buying high by all of these people HOLDRING

----------


## dannno

> Lots of people were getting sold on buying up bitcoins, I saw it all over reddit during the crash a few years ago when it went down like 10 grand. There were people buying it when it was up because they thought it would keep going up like it did. It was the main reason why it went up so much, because so many people were duped into buying high by all of these people HOLDRING


There is nothing wrong with buying bitcoin at any price it has been, because eventually it will go much higher. There are certainly better times to buy than others. 

The point is nobody should have put their life savings into bitcoin. I always recommend putting in smaller buys over time. I remember somebody on RPF asked me a long time ago if they should buy bitcoin when it was $650. I said go for it, buy a small amount. It might keep going down, I have no idea. But as it dips, keep buying more and then when it goes up you will have a lot. 

They didn't listen to me. I think they bought some and then it went down and they sold it when it was low, and didn't buy it back when it went lower. 

In the meantime, I was making very small buys at $650 since I already had some, then when it went down to the $250-$350 range, I started making bigger purchases. That strategy paid off very well.

The only people who have lost money in bitcoin have foolishly sold it when it was low, then didn't buy any back when it went lower.

----------


## nikcers

> There is nothing wrong with buying bitcoin at any price it has been, because eventually it will go much higher. There are certainly better times to buy than others. 
> 
> The point is nobody should have put their life savings into bitcoin. I always recommend putting in smaller buys over time. I remember somebody on RPF asked me a long time ago if they should buy bitcoin when it was $650. I said go for it, buy a small amount. It might keep going down, I have no idea. But as it dips, keep buying more and then when it goes up you will have a lot. 
> 
> They didn't listen to me. I think they bought some and then it went down and they sold it when it was low, and didn't buy it back when it went lower. 
> 
> In the meantime, I was making very small buys at $650 since I already had some, then when it went down to the $250-$350 range, I started making bigger purchases. That strategy paid off very well.
> 
> The only people who have lost money in bitcoin have foolishly sold it when it was low, then didn't buy any back when it went lower.


Sounds like a pyramid scheme to me, some people make a lot of money but its always money coming from new people buying into the bitcoin. I am glad you didn't lose out on it or anything I just don't recommend it unless you are trying to buy something off the dark web or launder money.

----------


## dannno

> Sounds like a pyramid scheme to me, some people make a lot of money but its always money coming from new people buying into the bitcoin. I am glad you didn't lose out on it or anything I just don't recommend it unless you are trying to buy something off the dark web or launder money.


If the value keeps going up, nobody loses their money. The people who lose their money are the ones holding government fiat. Government fiat is what is screwing everybody. The people who make money on bitcoin are early adopters.. they are the heroes who are helping to save humanity from the fiat monopolies. They are building up the network, helping the tech get better. They deserve to get rich.

----------


## timosman

> If the value keeps going up, nobody loses their money. The people who lose their money are the ones holding government fiat. Government fiat is what is screwing everybody. The people who make money on bitcoin are early adopters.. they are the heroes who are helping to save humanity from the fiat monopolies. They are building up the network, helping the tech get better. They deserve to get rich.


You sound desperate.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> If the value keeps going up.


Forever?

----------


## dannno

> Forever?


No, but probably for the next couple decades... if not bitcoin, some type of crypto or another or many. That is the future of money. Decentralization. Gold and silver is the future of money, too.

----------


## dannno

> You sound desperate.


The people who invent and help aid in the development of future technologies that are life saving to humanity should get rich off of it. People like you certainly don't deserve to get rich off of it. If bitcoin helps save humanity, it will be despite all of your negative nay-saying.

----------


## timosman



----------


## timosman

> The people who invent and help aid in the development of future technologies that are life saving to humanity should get rich off of it. People like you certainly don't deserve to get rich off of it. If bitcoin helps save humanity, it will be despite all of your negative nay-saying.


Have you considered the possibility of bitcoin destroying the humanity?

----------


## dannno

> Have you considered the possibility of bitcoin destroying the humanity?


How do you figure?

Does abolishing slavery destroy humanity?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> How do you figure?
> 
> Does abolishing slavery destroy humanity?


Have you heard of the Mark of the Beast?

----------


## timosman

> Have you heard of the Mark of the Beast?


or ..... electricity?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> or ..... electricity?


If you can't touch it you don't own it.

----------


## timosman

> If you can't touch it you don't own it.


War reparations in BTC. Progress!

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Yes, you can cash in your bitcoin and buy electricity, or equipment to generate electricity. Or you can get a cyrpto Visa card and pay your utility bill with bitcoin. Eventually utility companies will accept crypto without converting it to cash. But in the meantime, it is still seamless to do so.


If that is considered "electrically backed" then the dollar is gold backed.

----------


## dannno

> If that is considered "electrically backed" then the dollar is gold backed.


That wasn't my definition of electricity backed, I was answering a question.

----------


## dannno

> Have you heard of the Mark of the Beast?


Crypto doesn't require the mark of the beast, that is something man will have to implement.. and it doesn't require cyrpto to implement. Haven't you seen idiocracy?

----------


## dannno

> If you can't touch it you don't own it.


Physical gold is fine, but even a gold backed currency is only as good as the institution that is backing the currency. If they don't hold enough gold, or if the gold is stolen, then the currency becomes worthless. 

Crypto is an algorithm. It is predictable and acts the way in which it is programmed to act. I have crypto device sitting right here. You could steal it and you still wouldn't own it, and I still would own the cyrpto. You would just have a device that holds the crypto. You can't say that about gold. If somebody came into my house while I was away, or with high amounts of fire power they could steal my gold - but they won't get my crypto, I will still own that. 

There are pro's and cons to both.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Crypto doesn't require the mark of the beast, that is something man will have to implement.. and it doesn't require cyrpto to implement. Haven't you seen idiocracy?


Crypto moves us towards a cashless society, that is a major step to the Mark of the Beast, it will only require a government hijack to get us there.

----------


## dannno

> Crypto moves us towards a cashless society, that is a major step to the Mark of the Beast, it will only require a government hijack to get us there.


But it also protects us, there are countless cyrpto currencies you can use that they won't be able to stop you from using after fiat cash becomes illegal. 

Worst case scenario is the govt develops cyrpto on their own and implements it without any competition.

----------


## Stratovarious

> But it also protects us, there are countless cyrpto currencies you can use that they won't be able to stop you from using after fiat cash becomes illegal. 
> 
> _Worst case scenario_ is the govt develops cyrpto on their own and implements it without any competition.



I believe the 'term' is 'worse case scenario' ,  but either way you have no idea or concept of 'worse case scenario' .


Not only is it a 'trendy' Segway to cashless, as I have told you many times, it is also fiat, not that it can't 
become backed by something at some point , it is what it is .



And as I have said countless times ; it is hackable, and in fact has been and will continue to be hacked.

It is also likely to already be a CIA op, period, if not from conception , there will no doubt be govt access 
, back doors , and eventual regulation and control. 

Go see Catherine  Fitts if you still doubt what I'm trying to get you to 'get' .

----------


## Paul799

> The point is that the bitcoin payment network is what is valuable. It is cheaper and better than what we currently have as far as being able to transfer value over long distances without shipping costs, and wiring money without paying banking institutions.


I never touched a crypto and I'm all for avoiding banking institutions.
That said, Bitcoin being the cheaper value transfer option is not true. 
Or rather, it's true only under particular circumstances, namely 
a) the sender has already Btc
b) the recipient is happy to receive Btc

In case of $ --> Btc --> $, which is by far the most common case as in our society the acceptance of Btc as a currency is near to zero, even PayPal is a cheaper way to transfer value than Btc.
I don't know what you mean by better, but for sure you didn't mean faster.

I think blockchain will offer payment network options which will be cheaper and faster than the current one, but that won't be Bitcoin.
Bitcoin opened the door, so to speak, that's its undeniable merit, but its not the best blockchain based currency forever

----------


## dannno

> I never touched a crypto and I'm all for avoiding banking institutions.
> That said, Bitcoin being the cheaper value transfer option is not true. 
> Or rather, it's true only under particular circumstances, namely 
> a) the sender has already Btc
> b) the recipient is happy to receive Btc
> 
> In case of $ --> Btc --> $, which is by far the most common case as in our society the acceptance of Btc as a currency is near to zero, even PayPal is a cheaper way to transfer value than Btc.
> I don't know what you mean by better, but for sure you didn't mean faster.
> 
> ...


I'm not saying it's always the best payment system to use from a _practical_ standpoint right now, I'm saying it is the best payment system platform we have _available_ to us right now. Because it is not being utilized very heavily, that makes it less practical. But it also makes the cost of a bitcoin extremely cheap and if we were to begin to see more widspread adoption, that cost will rise dramatically.

You are also right that bitcoin might not be "the one". It could be "one of many", or it could be outpaced by others. Right now, it is "the one". Last I checked, it was hovering around 50% of the total marketcap of all cryptos. And it is dynamic. There are teams of geniuses working not just on the bitcoin project itself, but working on related software, services, hardware and institutions that are integrated with crypto, primarily bitcoin. If you had to put money on one, you would probably want to pick bitcoin. However I advocate for and own alt currencies as well. Most of them I bought with bitcoin profits because they are highly speculative, but I have gotten a few that have taken off (and cooled back down, but still much higher than where they started).

----------


## Paul799

> If you had to put money on one, you would probably want to pick bitcoin.


No. I would want to pick a serious gold-backed stablecoin project 

Among institutionals (enterprises, fonds, banks, multinationals, governments, sovereign fonds etc.) there is as much as zero interest in Bitcoin, both as a investment and as a means of payment or value transfering.
They are interested in Stablecoins.

Folks living in countries with currencies subject to depreciation.
No interest in Bitcoin. 
They want Stablecoins.

Bitcoin right now is _the one_ only in the crypto-sphere, among crypto-enthusiasts.
Probably it will stay that way. A niche role

----------


## Mordan

> So if I want to cash in my bitcoin, I can get electricity?


So I want to cash in my gold, I can get elbow grease?

----------


## Mordan

> No. I would want to pick a serious gold-backed stablecoin project


why would I want that? I would have to trust the bank holding the gold to be honest.

History showed us that this is not possible. Human nature prevents it. Crypto uses math nature to prevent fraud.

Bitcoin is the most elegant way to link math and the real world(energy/electricity) through the process of mining.

----------


## dannno

> No. I would want to pick a serious gold-backed stablecoin project 
> 
> Among institutionals (enterprises, fonds, banks, multinationals, governments, sovereign fonds etc.) there is as much as zero interest in Bitcoin, both as a investment and as a means of payment or value transfering.
> They are interested in Stablecoins.
> 
> Folks living in countries with currencies subject to depreciation.
> No interest in Bitcoin. 
> They want Stablecoins.
> 
> ...


What happens when a government comes in and confiscates the gold that the crypto is backed by? Or what if the people who run the thing steal the gold or misrepresent the holdings?

Major weakness. 

I would love to see gold backed crypto, I just don't think it is a good idea to put all the eggs in that basket.

----------


## Paul799

@Mordan, @dannno,
I agree with you about Bitcoin needing less trust that a gold-backed stablecoin.
I'd only correct you, just to safe face, when you talk about banks holding the metals. 
It doesn't need to be a bank.


The second point is, what if confiscation.
This danger exists for bitcoin too.
What if Govs declare trading of bitcoin illegal. Buying with bitcoin is illegal, just the act of offering bitcoin in exchange of good or services is illegal.
Accepting bitcoins as a means of payment is illegal. Just showing the readiness of accepting bitcoins to that purpose is illegal.
That would make bitcoins as a currency, useless.


"What happens when a government comes in and confiscates the gold that the crypto is backed by?"
If the metal is managed by an organisation with multiple vaults around the world, in this case they would move the metals out of the country and into a vault in another country.
For example, in case of the gold-backed stablecoin Kinesis, the organisation managing the metals is the Allocated Bullion Exchange, with vaults in 7 locations around the world. 
I like their inventory management, particularly the Inspection and Audit Section
https://abx.com/technology-services/storage-logistics/

But I don't trust Kinesis because of that. Basically I trust them because among their Advisers there is Andrew Maguire, who was a whistleblower at the CFTC during the investigation about the manipulation of the gold and silver market.

----------


## dannno

> @Mordan, @dannno,
> I agree with you about Bitcoin needing less trust that a gold-backed stablecoin.
> I'd only correct you, just to safe face, when you talk about banks holding the metals. 
> It doesn't need to be a bank.
> 
> 
> The second point is, what if confiscation.
> This danger exists for bitcoin too.
> What if Govs declare trading of bitcoin illegal. Buying with bitcoin is illegal, just the act of offering bitcoin in exchange of good or services is illegal.
> ...



The difference is that gold must be held at a physical location and the enforcement arm of the government can easily come take it. Having multiple, secure locations is a good protection, and I still support people who want to try that. It's simply risky.

Bitcoin cannot just be taken like gold, in a physical sense. They need the keys and stuff.

The government can ban bitcoin, but how would they enforce it? There are also a lot of governments around the world. They would all have to ban it and enforce it.. and when that happens, you inevitably get bubbles that pop up where it isn't being enforced and those people will say to themselves, "hey, I wonder why all these governments are being oppressive and banning bitcoin?" They will try it, it will work well, they will prosper and other places will see the example and how great it is working and they will elect people to government who will allow bitcoin. Then as it becomes more apparent at how good it is, countries that have a tougher ban in place will have to fight harder, but they will have a good reason to.

----------


## JoshuaM

> *Does an 80% price drop spell the end of Bitcoin?*
> 
> 
> https://smaulgld.com/is-it-game-over-for-bitcoin/


I used my bitcoins to buy gold from Bullion Exchanges. If you think about it, gold is always the better investment. https://bullionexchanges.com/

----------


## Paul799

@dannno,
I agree with everything you say.

----------


## Mordan

> @Mordan, @dannno,
> 
> The second point is, what if confiscation.
> This danger exists for bitcoin too.
> What if Govs declare trading of bitcoin illegal. Buying with bitcoin is illegal, just the act of offering bitcoin in exchange of good or services is illegal.
> Accepting bitcoins as a means of payment is illegal. Just showing the readiness of accepting bitcoins to that purpose is illegal.
> That would make bitcoins as a currency, useless.


Bitcoin is information on a publicly shared ledger. Good luck making that illegal at the Supreme Court Level. Bitcoin is akin to language, protected by the 1st amendement.

its just that we decided those strings of characters on that ledger are valuable. Books are valuable too :0

----------


## Paul799

> Bitcoin is information on a publicly shared ledger. Good luck making that illegal at the Supreme Court Level. Bitcoin is akin to language, protected by the 1st amendement.


 @Mordan, 
I wasn't talking about making Bitcoin illegal.
I was talking about making its use as a currency illegal.
(Like they are doing currently in China, for example: trading is allowed, buying goods and services with it no.)

I wasn't talking about the USA, I was talking about Governments, plural.

USA: authorities have 1000 ways to prevent Bitcoin to become a viable widespread currency without having to make it illegal, for example through tax laws, so the 1st amendment doesn't matter

----------


## Mordan

> @Mordan, 
> I wasn't talking about making Bitcoin illegal.
> I was talking about making its use as a currency illegal.
> (Like they are doing currently in China, for example: trading is allowed, buying goods and services with it no.)
> 
> I wasn't talking about the USA, I was talking about Governments, plural.
> 
> USA: authorities have 1000 ways to prevent Bitcoin to become a viable widespread currency without having to make it illegal, for example through tax laws, so the 1st amendment doesn't matter


So barter is illegal? 

Maybe they can craft a law. But I doubt it. It is still the land of the free.

----------


## JessicaStone

> *Does an 80% price drop spell the end of Bitcoin?*
> 
> 
> https://3commas.io/


As for me, Bitcoin is more then real currency with the great development. You can work here and get good income if you are aware on the area. Moreover, if you use special tools for your work, your income will increase more and more.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> The second point is, what if confiscation.
> This danger exists for bitcoin too.
> What if Govs declare trading of bitcoin illegal. Buying with bitcoin is  illegal, just the act of offering bitcoin in exchange of good or  services is illegal.
> Accepting bitcoins as a means of payment is illegal. Just showing the  readiness of accepting bitcoins to that purpose is illegal.
> That would make bitcoins as a currency, useless.


Exactly




> Bitcoin cannot just be taken like gold, in a physical sense.


There's no need to take bitcoin; just control the things which one can buy with bitcoin.

For physical goods, which make up the vast majority of all goods, that's relatively easy to do.

Without the state's permission, bitcoin won't survive outside some niche markets, mostly for non-physical goods like music files.

----------


## dannno

> There's no need to take bitcoin; just control the things which one can buy with bitcoin.
> 
> For physical goods, which make up the vast majority of all goods, that's relatively easy to do.
> 
> Without the state's permission, bitcoin won't survive outside some niche markets, mostly for non-physical goods like music files.


The government can't confiscate bitcoin.. How do you imagine that mechanism would work??

As for not allowing it's use, how many 'states' are there (not US states, like, all states)? 

Do you know how those balloons work that they make different animals with?

Yes, a single government, or multiple governments can make it difficult to use bitcoin. But what does that do? It shows people that the establishment doesn't want it, and puts more pressure in other areas of use (both geographically and otherwise)

I have no idea why you think bitcoin is going to be useful for buying music files.. People transfer digital assets all the time for pretty much everything. Crypto is the future, and right now bitcoin is digital gold.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> The government can't confiscate bitcoin.. How do you imagine that mechanism would work??


I just said in the post you're quoting that they don't need to confiscate bitcoin. 




> Yes, a single government, or multiple governments can make it difficult to use bitcoin. But what does that do?


Make bitcoin considerably less useful as a medium of exchange 




> I have no idea why you think bitcoin is going to be useful for buying music files..


Assuming the anonymizing technology works, the weakness (as to preventing detection) lies in the physical supply chain for the goods. 

Clandestinely selling cars, for example, requires warehouses, lots, in-person delivery or pick-up, etc. 

This isn't a problem for MP3s or other non-physical goods.

----------


## dannno

> I just said in the post you're quoting that they don't need to confiscate bitcoin. 
> 
> 
> 
> Make bitcoin considerably less useful as a medium of exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> Assuming the anonymizing technology works, the weakness (as to preventing detection) lies in the physical supply chain for the goods. 
> ...


So you ignore the main crux of the argument and argue against everything else, out of context... good job

Crypto isn't just available in the US, it's available globally. Knock it down in one place, it's going to be that much more attractive for people in other places.. and the place where they cracked down as well, in the longrun.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> So you ignore the main crux of the argument and argue against everything else, out of context... good job


...?

What did I ignore or take out of context?

----------


## dannno

> ...?
> 
> What did I ignore or take out of context?


Are you Britney Spears?




> Crypto isn't just available in the US, it's available globally. Knock it  down in one place, it's going to be that much more attractive for  people in other places.. and the place where they cracked down as well,  in the longrun.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Crypto isn't just available in the US, it's available globally. Knock it   down in one place, it's going to be that much more attractive for   people in other places.. and the place where they cracked down as well,   in the longrun.


Okay, and?

As I said in my original response, outlawing bitcoin anywhere will make bitcoin less valuable.

Above you claim that outlawing bitcoin would be good for bitcoin, because magic.

Suffice it to say, I disagree (as should have been obvious).

----------


## dannno

> Okay, and?
> 
> *As I said in my original response, outlawing bitcoin anywhere will make bitcoin less valuable.*
> 
> Above you claim that outlawing bitcoin would be good for bitcoin, because magic.
> 
> Suffice it to say, I disagree (as should have been obvious).


Uh, no, it makes it more valuable... because, perception.. and geography.. and the sheer magnitude of everywhere else in the world that didn't do it that day..

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Uh, no, it makes it more valuable... because, perception.. and geography.. and the sheer magnitude of everywhere else in the world that didn't do it that day..


The value of a currency is determined by what can be bought with it. 

This is why, for example, it would be very bad news for the dollar if it were dropped by the foreign countries that currently use it. 

The same applies to bitcoin.

----------


## dannno

> The value of a currency is determined by what can be bought with it.


No, it's determined by the market.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> No, it's determined by the market.


Of course, but we can make some pretty sound predictions about how market actors are likely to behave.

For instance, if I print up some r3v bucks, exchangeable only for stuff in my refrigerator, odds are very few people are going to buy them.

Once my refrigerator is empty, odds are no one is going to buy them.

----------


## dannno

> Of course, but we can make some pretty sound predictions about how market actors are likely to behave.
> 
> For instance, if I print up some r3v bucks, exchangeable only for stuff in my refrigerator, odds are very few people are going to buy them.
> 
> Once my refrigerator is empty, odds are no one is going to buy them.


That is a horrible analogy.

----------


## timosman

> That is a horrible analogy.


Rev 3.0 hardware is overheating. The level of insanity of his posts went significantly up just recently.

----------


## Paul799

> The value of a currency is determined by what can be bought with it.


Good remark r3, this is the point.

The original thesis was, Govs can't confiscate bitcoin, as if this were an advantage of Btc vs. gold.

The question: can the Gov confiscate Btc? is meaningless.
The main question is: can the Gov prevent Btc from being used?

This is the main question because preventing Btc from being used in order to buy things brings out the same results as of confiscating it.

There is x. 
The value of x consists in deploying it in order to reach a goal.
Question: Can the Gov confiscate x?
Who cares.
This is a meaningless question.
The main question is, can the Gov block its deployment? as in: "You can keep your x at home. No problem. Just don't use it.")
If the Gov can block its deployment, x becomes useless.

Some people probably feel that keeping a non-confiscated but deployment-blocked, valueless x is better than having it confiscated ("I don't care if I can't use it. It's still mine and I can keep it"), but we are talking about the role of Btc and gold within the financial system, not about individual feelings.

Comparing Btc with gold, we were comparing their potential role as currencies.

Gold can become valueless as currency, if the Gov decide to (e.g. through confiscation).
Bitcoin can become valueless as currency, if the Gov decide to (e.g. through declaring its deployment illegal).

When you compare Btc vs. gold as money, the main question is if the Gov can block them from being currencies, not if the Gov can confiscate them.

So, can the Gov confiscate gold? 
Yes.
Can the Gov confiscate Btc? 
No.
Does that matter in comparing Btc and gold as potential currencies?
No.

In comparing Btc and gold, what matters then?
What matters is the possibility of the Gov to block them from being deployed as currencies.
Under this perspective, is Btc better than gold?
No
Why not?
I give up

----------


## Paul799

On the other hand, let's consider gold and Bitcoin not as money but as investments
In this case, the possibility of confiscation is relevant.
"Gold can be confiscated, Bitcoin can't."
Is it true?

Gold confiscation means the Gov going for gold depositories, vaults... etc., not search warranting private houses.
Same with Bitcoin: Gov going for Exchanges, forcing public or major entities (banks, funds...) to hand out their Bitcoins (e.g. they have declared them on their balance sheets), leaving private wallets alone.

So, under the point of view of the confiscation possibility, is Bitcoin superior to gold?
I don't think so

----------


## dannno

> So, under the point of view of the confiscation possibility, is Bitcoin superior to gold?
> I don't think so


Bitcoin has advantages over gold in some areas, and gold has advantages over bitcoin in other areas. 

They should both be legal to use, and in a free market both crypto and gold would absolutely be valued and used as payments.

----------


## Paul799

By the way, when we compare precious metals and Bitcoins, let's not forget that there is not only gold. 
There is, e.g., silver too.

So, again, under the point of view of the confiscability, is Bitcoin superior to silver? as in "Silver can be confiscated, Bitcoin can't"?
Confiscating silver? e.g., as in silverware?

----------


## dannno

> By the way, when we compare precious metals and Bitcoins, let's not forget that there is not only gold. 
> There is, e.g., silver too.
> 
> So, again, under the point of view of the confiscability, is Bitcoin superior to silver? as in "Silver can be confiscated, Bitcoin can't"?
> Confiscating silver? e.g., as in silverware?


I'm talking about everything, all qualities.. not just confiscation. You can't tell me that if one person lives in Hong Kong and another person lives in Costa Rica and they want make a large transaction quickly that gold is going to be a better option for payment.. 

Bitcoin is also a little better than gold and silver for government confiscation because the government can seize your metals and you might not ever get it back. 

With bitcoin, *the* government of *a* country can make it illegal.. but that doesn't squash bitcoin.. it would still have value, and you would still hold it.. then EVERY government on earth would have to make it illegal.. and if EVERY government on earth made it illegal, except for ONE government.. and if that country was decent size and bitcoin became the dominant currency.. it would still be worth much more than it is today.. and that country would prosper, and other countries would see what a great option it is, and they would fight revolutions to make it legal in their country, if that's what it took. Or they would just refuse to vote for anybody who didn't want to legalize it if that is an option.

----------


## alexmorhome

Thanks for sharing
cheap hydrocodone
Learn more about CBD
Stop addiction

----------

