Planet Rugby Forum

bimboman Mon Feb 05, 2018 wrote:

sorCrer wrote:

bimboman wrote:My point is you'll need USD or a currency equivalent .... You don't view your self as having lost money in the last week, but in your eventual plan of being long BTC you have, the book value has halved in any real trading terms you've lost money.

The largest part (+80%) of my portfolio was bought at $350 - $600. The price of Bitcoin on this date one year ago was $1017. I bought the bulk of my XRP holdings at 0.06c

Great, you are missing my point, if you sold all of it at $17,000 and bought them back today you'd have made a big profit. You seem to miss that traditional investments have their returns measuresd periodically against a new set price , if you don't do that performance isn't correctly measured.

As I've said to you before if you've a few million in coins sell some and buy real,world stuff with it.

derriz wrote:That's bollox - the potential was obvious and the number of applications was exploding - every week there new exciting websites. I distinctly remember showing a non-techy friend some web sites on Mosaic running on an monochrome X-terminal in 93 and he was blown away - I had to drag him away from IMDB. E-comerce applications existed long before 99 - I put a small bookshop online in 95 using PerlCGI, a close friend single-handedly wrote the first nationally successful recruitment/jobs website which launched in late 95. 10 years after Mosaic would bring us to 2003/2004 - there were almost a billion web/internet users globally at that stage. How many people have crypto accounts or use applications based on crypto/DL 10 years after bitcoin was launched?

Same year as Ebay and Amazon started. I was working for ECNet in the late 90's developing e-commerce solutions and had been building websites since 94. I've done that ever since. The internet was incomparable to what it is today.

derriz wrote:Fear - unlike you (I suspect), I've actually been involved in building a smart contract/DL application (for the energy markets). An no, I'm not just attacking BTC or even crytocurrencies generally - I'm attacking the whole idea that crypto DL technology has a great future. Tech fads come and go, this one will die soon also.

Anonymous. wrote:He would have made a big profit if he had just sold them. Buying them back as it was falling like a stone would have just been silly.

derriz wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

derriz wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Anonymous. wrote:I hope Bitcoin will one day work properly as a currency. I think it will probably be about 1 Bitcoin to the dollar

That's obviously an observation rooted in a deep and profound understanding of economics in general and crypto-currencies in particular.

What area of economics could help in valuing BTC? Assuming you're not a chartist (tarrot card reader)?

No underlying economic supply/demand (given it's uselessness for payments) and no future cashflows (unlike cash, bonds, equities, etc.) and the ability to fork/launch new "coins" anytime mean it's only intrinsic scarcity is the novelty of being early - there's no possible scarcity of cryptocoins. It's intrinsically worthless except as a curio.

Sorry, but that is impossibly stupid.

Of course it's not worthless; It is used in financial transactions. You can exchange it for dollars. You can use it to buy stuff. Saying that it's worthless makes Annon's vapid comment seem extremely deep.

So that's what an opinion "rooted in a deep and profound understanding of economics in general and crypto-currencies in particular" looks like in your mind? It only seems stupid to you because of your own ignorance of economic pricing models.

So where can you spend BTC - what can you buy with BTC? How much business is conducted using BTC as the exchange mechanism? How do you earn a return on a BTC holding? What prevents the limitless invention of cryptocurrencies and what is intrisically (you seemed to have overlooked this word) valuable about BTC which doesn't apply to the millions of alt-shitcoins?

sewa wrote:As us Irish found out during our property crash ten years ago something is only worth what anyone else is at that point in time willing to pay for it. And that is when it comes to something that has some intrinsic value, the land, materials etc. If people lose faith in bitcoin it will be pretty much worthless. No one sensible would buy them just because they love the tech

sorCrer wrote:

Anonymous. wrote:He would have made a big profit if he had just sold them. Buying them back as it was falling like a stone would have just been silly.

The thing is I didn't need to. I have no heirs and worse, very little desire for large vanity purchases although I will spend more that I should sometimes on food & drink.

Rinkals wrote:

sewa wrote:As us Irish found out during our property crash ten years ago something is only worth what anyone else is at that point in time willing to pay for it. And that is when it comes to something that has some intrinsic value, the land, materials etc. If people lose faith in bitcoin it will be pretty much worthless. No one sensible would buy them just because they love the tech

You could say exactly the same thing about national currencies.

If you want to take it that far, then the value of a five pound note is bound to the value of a small rectangle of paper.

sewa wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

sewa wrote:As us Irish found out during our property crash ten years ago something is only worth what anyone else is at that point in time willing to pay for it. And that is when it comes to something that has some intrinsic value, the land, materials etc. If people lose faith in bitcoin it will be pretty much worthless. No one sensible would buy them just because they love the tech

You could say exactly the same thing about national currencies.

If you want to take it that far, then the value of a five pound note is bound to the value of a small rectangle of paper.

In the developed economies of the world a national currency falling like bitcoin is unheard of. Even the Uk pound rarely drops more than 20% in a year

sorCrer wrote:

derriz wrote:That's bollox - the potential was obvious and the number of applications was exploding - every week there new exciting websites. I distinctly remember showing a non-techy friend some web sites on Mosaic running on an monochrome X-terminal in 93 and he was blown away - I had to drag him away from IMDB. E-comerce applications existed long before 99 - I put a small bookshop online in 95 using PerlCGI, a close friend single-handedly wrote the first nationally successful recruitment/jobs website which launched in late 95. 10 years after Mosaic would bring us to 2003/2004 - there were almost a billion web/internet users globally at that stage. How many people have crypto accounts or use applications based on crypto/DL 10 years after bitcoin was launched?

Same year as Ebay and Amazon started. I was working for ECNet in the late 90's developing e-commerce solutions and had been building websites since 94. I've done that ever since. The internet was incomparable to what it is today.

derriz wrote:Fear - unlike you (I suspect), I've actually been involved in building a smart contract/DL application (for the energy markets). An no, I'm not just attacking BTC or even crytocurrencies generally - I'm attacking the whole idea that crypto DL technology has a great future. Tech fads come and go, this one will die soon also.

I've written a currently non-commercial smart contract application specifically around contractual control of sim swapping. I'm looking for funding to drive that. I have written many e-commerce applications including some driving worldwide aviation sites.

Maybe it will die, after all this has been predicted many times going back to 2010 (https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/).

However, you don't need to be bitter next time just chase and monetize a fad more aggressively.

paddyor wrote:This is obviously a scam

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-problem

A5D5E5 wrote:

paddyor wrote:This is obviously a scam

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... on-problem

Stories like this just make cryptocurrencies look like a tax on the credulous.

Researchers in Germany have found hundreds of links to child sexual abuse imagery on Bitcoin's blockchain.

This could make using the blockchain, a digital ledger of crypto-currency transactions, illegal.

The study, from RWTH Aachen University, also said other files on the blockchain may violate copyright and privacy laws.

Researchers said they had found eight files with sexual content. And three of these contained content "objectionable for almost all jurisdictions".

Two of these between them listed more than 200 links to child sexual abuse imagery, the study said.

And if records of the files were stored on users' computers, they may be in violation of the law.

Garrick Hileman, a crypto-currency expert at Cambridge University, said the issue of illegal content had been "discussed and known about for awhile."

Pruning, or altering parts of the blockchain ledger, would allow users to rid their local copies of illegal content, he said, but was likely to be too technical for most Bitcoin users.

"There are big barriers anytime you need to make modifications," Mr Hileman said.

But he added that although maintaining a complete record of the blockchain was more secure than an altered copy, "many would argue that it's not that important".

Related Topics

Leinster in London wrote:I'll just drop this here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43485572

Researchers in Germany have found hundreds of links to child sexual abuse imagery on Bitcoin's blockchain.

This could make using the blockchain, a digital ledger of crypto-currency transactions, illegal.

The study, from RWTH Aachen University, also said other files on the blockchain may violate copyright and privacy laws.

Researchers said they had found eight files with sexual content. And three of these contained content "objectionable for almost all jurisdictions".

Two of these between them listed more than 200 links to child sexual abuse imagery, the study said.

And if records of the files were stored on users' computers, they may be in violation of the law.

Garrick Hileman, a crypto-currency expert at Cambridge University, said the issue of illegal content had been "discussed and known about for awhile."

Pruning, or altering parts of the blockchain ledger, would allow users to rid their local copies of illegal content, he said, but was likely to be too technical for most Bitcoin users.

"There are big barriers anytime you need to make modifications," Mr Hileman said.

But he added that although maintaining a complete record of the blockchain was more secure than an altered copy, "many would argue that it's not that important".

Related Topics

Anonymous. wrote:

sorCrer wrote:

Anonymous. wrote:He would have made a big profit if he had just sold them. Buying them back as it was falling like a stone would have just been silly.

The thing is I didn't need to. I have no heirs and worse, very little desire for large vanity purchases although I will spend more that I should sometimes on food & drink.

I know you are in it for the tech and as it falls from $17k to currently $3.7k you had no need to sell The same will be true when it falls to $1k.

sorCrer wrote:

Leinster in London wrote:I'll just drop this here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43485572

Researchers in Germany have found hundreds of links to child sexual abuse imagery on Bitcoin's blockchain.

This could make using the blockchain, a digital ledger of crypto-currency transactions, illegal.

The study, from RWTH Aachen University, also said other files on the blockchain may violate copyright and privacy laws.

Researchers said they had found eight files with sexual content. And three of these contained content "objectionable for almost all jurisdictions".

Two of these between them listed more than 200 links to child sexual abuse imagery, the study said.

And if records of the files were stored on users' computers, they may be in violation of the law.

Garrick Hileman, a crypto-currency expert at Cambridge University, said the issue of illegal content had been "discussed and known about for awhile."

Pruning, or altering parts of the blockchain ledger, would allow users to rid their local copies of illegal content, he said, but was likely to be too technical for most Bitcoin users.

"There are big barriers anytime you need to make modifications," Mr Hileman said.

But he added that although maintaining a complete record of the blockchain was more secure than an altered copy, "many would argue that it's not that important".

Related Topics

Seriously?

https://www.dailydot.com/business/bitco ... tion-code/

Note the date.

One key feature of the block chain is that information added to it cannot be changed without significant effort.

In January, the amount of data that could be added to the BSV block chain was increased significantly.

Before that, people could generally add only short chunks of text or web links to the block chain.

But now it is possible to add full images in an encoded format.

Payment system Money Button said its service had been used to post the illegal images on the BSV block chain in early February.

So six years later rather than removing shit

ukjim wrote:I mined crypto for about 5 years or so and made some decent pocket money out of it.

Even with solar panels and batteries covering a good deal of production cost its now not worth it unless you have free electricity.

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

What a staggering waste of resources.

In a world where we try to build tech to do things more efficiently, use less resource, and waste less energy, I present to you bitcoin.

sorCrer wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

I see the US national debt surpassed $22 Trillion on the 12th. Quite staggering. https://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current

goeagles wrote:

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

What a staggering waste of resources.

In a world where we try to build tech to do things more efficiently, use less resource, and waste less energy, I present to you bitcoin.

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) living under an authoritarian regime.

Edit to add that Bitcoin could be more efficient but you basically have to trade security/vulnerability for efficiency. If you think of Bitcoin as a base settlement layer with other layers built on top of it, you want it to be very secure. Then you let layer 2 solutions like Lightning increase efficiency, without sacrificing anything on the base layer.

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) l

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

What a staggering waste of resources.

In a world where we try to build tech to do things more efficiently, use less resource, and waste less energy, I present to you bitcoin.

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) living under an authoritarian regime.

Edit to add that Bitcoin could be more efficient but you basically have to trade security/vulnerability for efficiency. If you think of Bitcoin as a base settlement layer with other layers built on top of it, you want it to be very secure. Then you let layer 2 solutions like Lightning increase efficiency, without sacrificing anything on the base layer.

Lightning just adds a bodge on top of the horrible inefficiency of bitcoin, and then loses the security.

And speaking of security, simple open source code shared can lead to massive fraud, as has occurred.

But in the bitcoin world there is no recourse.

It’s a complete mess.

goeagles wrote:

bimboman wrote:

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) l

And you think that the authorities will let challenges go unmonitored ?

They'll try but I think the cat will be out of the bag by that time.

bimboman wrote:

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) l

And you think that the authorities will let challenges go unmonitored ?

goeagles wrote:

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Yourmother wrote:

goeagles wrote:
It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

What a staggering waste of resources.

In a world where we try to build tech to do things more efficiently, use less resource, and waste less energy, I present to you bitcoin.

First, quite a bit of the energy used to mine Bitcoin comes from places with unused renewable energy, like hydro in Sichuan province, that would otherwise be wasted. But beyond that, just because you think Bitcoin is a waste of resources does not make it so. I happen to think, at the very least, it's an important hedge against a) the hyper-surveillance that will come with a cashless society, b) increasingly experimental monetary policy either being implemented (QE) or proposed (MMT) in developed nations and c) living under an authoritarian regime.

Edit to add that Bitcoin could be more efficient but you basically have to trade security/vulnerability for efficiency. If you think of Bitcoin as a base settlement layer with other layers built on top of it, you want it to be very secure. Then you let layer 2 solutions like Lightning increase efficiency, without sacrificing anything on the base layer.

Lightning just adds a bodge on top of the horrible inefficiency of bitcoin, and then loses the security.

And speaking of security, simple open source code shared can lead to massive fraud, as has occurred.

But in the bitcoin world there is no recourse.

It’s a complete mess.

Lightning adds a bodge on top of Bitcoin like Visa adds a layer on top of the USD. Not exactly like for like since Lightning is layer 2 and Visa is layer 3, but the point remains.

goeagles wrote:

sorCrer wrote:

goeagles wrote:

Azlan Roar wrote:It now costs more to make bitcoin than the cryptocurrency is worth according to an analysis by JP Morgan Chase, published in NS

It might cost more than $3500 in most places, but Bitcoin mining has been remarkably efficient at finding the cheapest unused power sources. Also, the price has been around this level for a couple months. I doubt people are going to mine at a loss for months. When those with higher mining costs end up having to stop mining, the difficulty adjustment goes down and it costs less to mine.

I see the US national debt surpassed $22 Trillion on the 12th. Quite staggering. https://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current

It's only going to continue to go up. We've got MMT people that seem to be in the ascendancy on the left in the US and the GOP has long given up the ghost of being the party of fiscal responsibility. I'm very glad we have a hedge against this in the form of Bitcoin.

Yourmother wrote:
It’s like you’ve not read the post.

Visa adds security on top of transactions and lightning does the exact opposite.

USD / banks are accountable and will deal with hacks. Bitcoin blockchain, the money is gone despite authorities knowing its fraud. And susceptible to open source code hacks.

Transaction speed and costs are not exactly brilliant for such a recent technology. And not to mention they are designed to get more expensive over time:

kiwinoz wrote:So Jamie "I'll sack anyone who trades in Cryptos" Dimon is now coming out with a JPM token. Please note the lying plum made his infamous crypto statement whilst in Euro desk was buying the dips.