€100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

All things Rugby
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ency-value

Another great buying oppurtunity, 4387 dollars
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

TranceNRG wrote:Cryptos bouncing back today. I was tempted to buy more the other day but decided not to increase my exposure.
:D :D :D
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

sewa wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:Cryptos bouncing back today. I was tempted to buy more the other day but decided not to increase my exposure.
:D :D :D
Image
User avatar
paddyor
Posts: 18463
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by paddyor »

https://twitter.com/DoveyWan/status/1064878600594305025

The wheelbarrow gives it a Weimar vibe.
User avatar
Floppykid
Posts: 29614
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: SOB>Todd

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Floppykid »

So, is democracy saved yet?
derriz
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by derriz »

Surely this thread deserves a bounce? Bitcoin has lost nearly half it's value since goeagles presented that comforting graph. And the other coins (which you were supposed to buy for "diversification") have done even worse.
merlin the happy pig
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by merlin the happy pig »

But I thought it was supposed to be a currency, not an investment?
I must have missed something :?
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

goeagles wrote:Edit to add that Bitcoin, like gold, is also a hedge against tail risk and that any discussion of how risky it is is incomplete without that.
Bitcoin is bouncing it's way down nicely
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

derriz wrote:
goeagles wrote:
Bowens wrote:Crypto crash now worse than dotcom

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-reach-80
It's not even Bitcoin's worst % loss in the last 5 years.

Image
That's a very deceptive graph.

Using a log price scale makes it look like an investor at the peak has only suffered minor losses.

The true scale of fall since the peak are clear when you scale the price linearly:
Image
lost more than half it's "value" again since your post.
User avatar
waguser
Posts: 12986
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by waguser »

Anonymous. wrote:
sewa wrote:
TranceNRG wrote:Cryptos bouncing back today. I was tempted to buy more the other day but decided not to increase my exposure.
:D :D :D
Image

:lol:
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

derriz
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by derriz »

sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
For me this is represents all that's wrong with the crypto technology research. Someone has managed to come up with a complicated, slow, expensive and non-general mechanism to do a limited form of 2 phase commit and this achievement gets hyped as a breakthrough.

Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
I am sure that is great consolation to the likes of Trancenrg who was busy buying shitloads of bitcoin at 20k and now finds them worth 3.3k
User avatar
A5D5E5
Posts: 11217
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by A5D5E5 »

sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
That article highlights the problem crypto currencies have if they are ever to really become mainstream. I am reasonably smart, fairly tech savvy and have free cash that is always looking for a home.

Yet I read that article and I get exactly the same impression I get when I read any article about crypto currencies - it is written for the benefit of the "insiders", not the general population. It is dripping with jargon and techno babble and should scare off anyone who is not immersed in the technology every day.

To really become mainstream, crypto currencies need to be communicated in a different way.
jezzer
Posts: 1422
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 6:57 pm

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by jezzer »

derriz wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
For me this is represents all that's wrong with the crypto technology research. Someone has managed to come up with a complicated, slow, expensive and non-general mechanism to do a limited form of 2 phase commit and this achievement gets hyped as a breakthrough.

Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
Not only that, but aren't blockchain resolutions INCREDIBLY energy-inefficient? I'm wary of reports and studies that try to estimate the energy consumed for blockchain activities such as mining Bitcoin, but it's clear we are talking about Gigawatts. This is "hidden" in the decentralised structure of blockchain, but the consumption is very much a reality.

Once blockchain were to expand to provide whatever solutions the world deemed necessary (2-phase commit, proof of work, replacement of tangible currencies) wouldn't the required energy consumption by miners/peers/whatever they end up being called cripple the combined global energy generation networks?

Blockchain appears to run counter to the global trend of energy-efficiency and appears to be an onerously expensive methodology for society.
User avatar
A5D5E5
Posts: 11217
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by A5D5E5 »

Seneca of the Night wrote:
A5D5E5 wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
That article highlights the problem crypto currencies have if they are ever to really become mainstream. I am reasonably smart, fairly tech savvy and have free cash that is always looking for a home.

Yet I read that article and I get exactly the same impression I get when I read any article about crypto currencies - it is written for the benefit of the "insiders", not the general population. It is dripping with jargon and techno babble and should scare off anyone who is not immersed in the technology every day.

To really become mainstream, crypto currencies need to be communicated in a different way.
Atomic swap is pretty catchy.
Meh. Atomic is so 19th century. The cool kids are into supersymmetric particles now. I'd go for "Quantum squark exchange".
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

jezzer wrote:
derriz wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
For me this is represents all that's wrong with the crypto technology research. Someone has managed to come up with a complicated, slow, expensive and non-general mechanism to do a limited form of 2 phase commit and this achievement gets hyped as a breakthrough.

Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
Not only that, but aren't blockchain resolutions INCREDIBLY energy-inefficient? I'm wary of reports and studies that try to estimate the energy consumed for blockchain activities such as mining Bitcoin, but it's clear we are talking about Gigawatts. This is "hidden" in the decentralised structure of blockchain, but the consumption is very much a reality.

Once blockchain were to expand to provide whatever solutions the world deemed necessary (2-phase commit, proof of work, replacement of tangible currencies) wouldn't the required energy consumption by miners/peers/whatever they end up being called cripple the combined global energy generation networks?

Blockchain appears to run counter to the global trend of energy-efficiency and appears to be an onerously expensive methodology for society.
Lightning Network (allowing for off chain transactions) was invented to mitigate the energy consumption. But you are correct proof of work transactional verification is not as energy efficient as proof of stake due to its competitive and lottery like mechanism.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
I am sure that is great consolation to the likes of Trancenrg who was busy buying shitloads of bitcoin at 20k and now finds them worth 3.3k
In it for the tech
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

Anonymous. wrote:
sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
I am sure that is great consolation to the likes of Trancenrg who was busy buying shitloads of bitcoin at 20k and now finds them worth 3.3k
In it for the tech
:lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

derriz wrote:Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
Sure, but none of them are decentralized or in a technical sense immutable. That said, existing technologies work perfectly well as they always have. Applications that would work well on a blockchain are potential things like genealogy tracking or traceability of parts, origin, public sector records etc.

I presume you're excluding smart contracts (and computing) on Turing-complete Ethereum and focusing mostly on the Bitcoin Blockchain.
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
I am sure that is great consolation to the likes of Trancenrg who was busy buying shitloads of bitcoin at 20k and now finds them worth 3.3k
I don't think he was buying them at $20k but if it's any consolation I hold quite a few and I don't think that they will ever go to 20k in the near to medium term. :lol:
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

sorCrer wrote:Lightning network grown another 10% this month with capacity up 15% to around 110 BTC.

Interesting video released this weekend paying for a Coke with a QR Code and Lightning Network.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fb6Xww2P7c
Now 4500 nodes with 488BTC

https://1ml.com/statistics
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
I am sure that is great consolation to the likes of Trancenrg who was busy buying shitloads of bitcoin at 20k and now finds them worth 3.3k
I don't think he was buying them at $20k but if it's any consolation I hold quite a few and I don't think that they will ever go to 20k in the near to medium term. :lol:
If you look at the dates on his posts they were very high when he was getting in. What wonderful technology, it turned his retirement house into a bedsit
derriz
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by derriz »

jezzer wrote:
derriz wrote:
sorCrer wrote:In far more important news: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/wo ... ken-place/
For me this is represents all that's wrong with the crypto technology research. Someone has managed to come up with a complicated, slow, expensive and non-general mechanism to do a limited form of 2 phase commit and this achievement gets hyped as a breakthrough.

Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
Not only that, but aren't blockchain resolutions INCREDIBLY energy-inefficient? I'm wary of reports and studies that try to estimate the energy consumed for blockchain activities such as mining Bitcoin, but it's clear we are talking about Gigawatts. This is "hidden" in the decentralised structure of blockchain, but the consumption is very much a reality.

Once blockchain were to expand to provide whatever solutions the world deemed necessary (2-phase commit, proof of work, replacement of tangible currencies) wouldn't the required energy consumption by miners/peers/whatever they end up being called cripple the combined global energy generation networks?

Blockchain appears to run counter to the global trend of energy-efficiency and appears to be an onerously expensive methodology for society.
Yeah and the current "solution" for public ledgers is to effectively delegate the processing to an external authority. Huge effort has gone into non-proof-of-work consensus - the Etherium people have been promising something for years - and as of yet nothing credible has been deployed.

The enterprise blockchain people (Corda, Hyperledger, etc.) have basically dropped the consensus part for this very reason so you end up with all the complexity of running a proof-of-work blockchain except it relies on a centralized trusted node to resolve ledger ordering.
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

sewa wrote:What wonderful technology, it turned his retirement house into a bedsit
Noting the the 'technology' didn't do anything to Trances money, anyone investing money they couldn't afford to lose in any technology or even stock deserves to lose it.

Did you also lose money you couldn't afford to? Is that why you're so bitter?
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21738
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sewa »

sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:What wonderful technology, it turned his retirement house into a bedsit
Noting the the 'technology' didn't do anything to Trances money, anyone investing money they couldn't afford to lose in any technology or even stock deserves to lose it.

Did you also lose money you couldn't afford to? Is that why you're so bitter?
I am a no coiner. My explanation for why can be found on page one of this thread and still remains just as valid today

(I did almost buy some though just for a laugh)
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

sewa wrote:Is the point of a currency not that you can use it to buy things. If people are just holding it then it is no more than a pyramid scheme
I'm presuming this one. Fair enough. :thumbup:
derriz
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by derriz »

sorCrer wrote:
derriz wrote:Meanwhile "traditional" unhyped technologies (databases, message queues, app servers, CICS, etc.) have been able to support fully general distributed transactions across products from different vendors using 2-phase commit for decades (e.g. X/Open XA is nearly 30 years). Distributed transactions are trivial (outside of the blockchain hype-bubble) and are not even considered a problem.

This "breakthrough" demonstrates that trying to build applications on this technology (blockchain) makes trivial tasks incredibly complex and difficult. Outside of some tiny tiny niches, you'd be mad to consider building any application on blockchain.
Sure, but none of them are decentralized or in a technical sense immutable. That said, existing technologies work perfectly well as they always have. Applications that would work well on a blockchain are potential things like genealogy tracking or traceability of parts, origin, public sector records etc.

I presume you're excluding smart contracts (and computing) on Turing-complete Ethereum and focusing mostly on the Bitcoin Blockchain.
Who cares? It's trivial to make a database table immutable even if you want it done with hard cryptographic guarantees. De-centralization offers no tangible benefits - high availability/fault tolerance/redundancy/replication/etc. with traditional IT technologies is also a solved problem - using serverless or cloud more-or-less gives it to you for free. Blockchain with or without smart contracts is a technology solution looking for a problem. It's been promising all sorts of cool applications for years and billions of VC and foolish ICO participants' money has been wasted on the pursuit yet it has delivered absolutely nothing except silly "demos" to other blockchainistas.

Could you name an actual existing widely-used application which demonstrates the utility of blockchain rather than hypothetical examples? Because I can't find a single useful application - the most promising (I used to think) IPFS is going nowhere.

All your examples, simply require simple cryptographic signatures not blockchain/smart contracts; anyone can cryptographically sign anything with a single command using openssl/libressl/whatever. Again a solved problem.
brero
Posts: 502
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by brero »

sorCrer wrote:Applications that would work well on a blockchain are potential things like ... traceability of parts
how would that work? i've seen this mentioned quite a bit as a potential application but haven't seen anything beyond vague marketing.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

sorCrer wrote:
sewa wrote:What wonderful technology, it turned his retirement house into a bedsit
Noting the the 'technology' didn't do anything to Trances money, anyone investing money they couldn't afford to lose in any technology or even stock deserves to lose it.

Did you also lose money you couldn't afford to? Is that why you're so bitter?
So people whose pension money is invested in stocks deserve to lose it if they can't afford to lose their pensions
User avatar
FairWeather_Aussie
Posts: 1157
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by FairWeather_Aussie »

Ironically, I think it was bitcoins rise to $20,000 that was it’s deathnell. That made it, ironically, worthless for its purpose, it was too unstable to be used as a transactional currency. It’s narrative was as that it was that. And I know one person who actually used bitcoin as a currency. He would change the appropriate number of euros into bitcoin and use that to buy a gram of coke on silkroad (or its successors). He used bitcoin exactly as it is suppose to be used, as a transactional currency, and didn’t hold it for more than a few minutes.

The problem with bitcoin is you can’t hold it for more than a few minutes if you intend to use it as a transactional currency. You don’t know what it will be worth in a day or a weeks time. +7%, +50%, - 10%...

The only reason to hold it is speculation. No different than tulip bulbs in the 17th century. It has no base worth, beyond what someone else will pay you for it.

As far as oher crypto-currency, I thought Etherium had a chance, but that is looking unlikely. The rest are mostly just the inventions of snake oil salesmen who have discovered a sucker niche.
User avatar
FairWeather_Aussie
Posts: 1157
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by FairWeather_Aussie »

Although I think bitcoin and all crypto currencies will eventually be worth less than tulips, the technology will continue. My prediction would be that one of the companies behind one of the crypto currencies, I’ve no idea which one, will srurvive the currency going to zero, and will instead become a major listed company based on their expertise in blockchain technology.
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37914
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by Anonymous 1 »

sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.
And Bitcoin at around 10c to a dollar will be a winner
bimboman
Posts: 65167
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by bimboman »

sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.

Maybe not, but the desperation from some quarters to de bunk it's total history is funny.
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

Anonymous. wrote:
sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.
And Bitcoin at around 10c to a dollar will be a winner
BTC at its current price is 10x what it was when we first started talking about it on here. A 'cryptocurrency' or derivative will replace hard currency. Despite the negativity around BTC for example, more and more of the younger generation are buying into it.
bimboman
Posts: 65167
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by bimboman »

sorCrer wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.
And Bitcoin at around 10c to a dollar will be a winner
BTC at its current price is 10x what it was when we first started talking about it on here. A 'cryptocurrency' or derivative will replace hard currency. Despite the negativity around BTC for example, more and more of the younger generation are buying into it.

It will only happen when the three or four largest powers allow it to happen. You get that right ?
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

https://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourd ... oin-again/

Refer link to Wall Street Journal.

Hardly dead?
User avatar
FairWeather_Aussie
Posts: 1157
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by FairWeather_Aussie »

sorCrer wrote:
Anonymous. wrote:
sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.
And Bitcoin at around 10c to a dollar will be a winner
BTC at its current price is 10x what it was when we first started talking about it on here. A 'cryptocurrency' or derivative will replace hard currency. Despite the negativity around BTC for example, more and more of the younger generation are buying into it.
I think its first price was about 3 cents. It’s up over 100 thousand fold since then. But I’m not sure what the point is?
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12219
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: €100 of Bitcoin in 2010 = €70m today

Post by sorCrer »

bimboman wrote:
sorCrer wrote:Tulip fever never happened the way you may think it did.

Maybe not, but the desperation from some quarters to de bunk it's total history is funny.

https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/book ... 14939.html

Anne Goldgar
Professor of early modern European history, King's College London.
Post Reply