Bitcoin, crypto currency and block chain...

[dmp]

But not ransomware. The "industry" was born of it like a cancerous growth.

You can expand your criticism a lot further. A lot of criminal activity was "born" from the internet.
I see your point, but i see more in crypto currencies than that.
In fact, I think a bigger negative will be people hiding / moving wealth, evading taxes.  Look at the panama papers and then think how much utility value a cryto currency might have.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Crime has always been with us, but the internet has reduced the cost/effort required for criminals to gain access to victims.

Scammers used to go door to door, to scam residents locally. The telephone makes it possible to have voice conversations without being in the same community.

Now with cheap internet telephone they don't even need to be in the same country, and often aren't.

Spam email is even worse where the cost is even lower, and humans remain willing and able to be fooled.

I probably delete one spam a day that gets through my filters, and probably one serious phishing attempt per week...  They are getting better and more believable all the time with their false constructs.

If they put half this effort into legal projects they could probably earn a decent living.

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

Looks like bitcoin tried to address the transaction limitations but ended up spit into two factions  (new one is called bitcoin cash or something like that). The bitcoin cash is currently trading at 1/10 value of bitcoin FWIW.

Interesting times.

JR

 

[dmp]

Looks like bitcoin tried to address the transaction limitations but ended up spit into two factions  (new one is called bitcoin cash or something like that). The bitcoin cash is currently trading at 1/10 value of bitcoin FWIW.

It has surprised me how fast this has moved. I'd been following the conflict between core developers and big blockers for months, then the NY agreement to adopt segwit2 which will have segwit followed by 2MB blocks, and then this hard fork.
I guess I have bitcoin on both forks now. 

It will be interesting if the 1MB to 2MB block size increase happens smoothly (or at all, if core devs block it).

 

[dmp]

It looks like the Wannacry hackers transferred there ransom proceeds to an exchange where they were converted to Monero last night.
Prepare for Monero to be dragged through the mud...

 

[JohnRoberts]

they gonged an attempt several months ago to sell a bitcoin ETF.  One of the commodity exchanges is considering selling futures on Bitcoin (both versions ), apparently in cooperation with Winklevoss (?) twins bitcoin exchange.

Bitcoin cash is still swinging pretty wildly but up some from first day.

JR

 

[iomegaman]

It has surprised me how fast this has moved. I'd been following the conflict between core developers and big blockers for months, then the NY agreement to adopt segwit2 which will have segwit followed by 2MB blocks, and then this hard fork.
I guess I have bitcoin on both forks now. 

It will be interesting if the 1MB to 2MB block size increase happens smoothly (or at all, if core devs block it).

This is what troubles me a bit about the whole crypto-vs-fiat thing...when you have a decentralized system reaching limits, then somehow convince the majority of coders to make a change, then have disagreements about the changes implementation so that codes end up as separate competing currencies its a bit like trying to get your cats in a row...and down that road, the 1 Meg to 2 Meg change hardly seems like a solution more of a bandaid to shove the problem down the road...it reminds me of Bill Gates suggesting "640k ought to be enough for anybody" (which he apparently never actually said...)

I have no hard numbers, but I suspect the amount of computers running transaction code vs the amount of computers in the world is a rather small fraction, and along those lines the number of transactions in a chain based on consumers actually USING crytpo-currency (bitcoin in this instance) vs the amount of consumers using fiat currency every day is even smaller, so doing a fork where you simply double the code block size is basically saying "We might double all of our chains/blocks but we really have no idea how to do this if the entire world gets onboard"

 

[dmp]

I have no hard numbers, but I suspect the amount of computers running transaction code vs the amount of computers in the world is a rather small fraction, and along those lines the number of transactions in a chain based on consumers actually USING crytpo-currency (bitcoin in this instance) vs the amount of consumers using fiat currency every day is even smaller, so doing a fork where you simply double the code block size is basically saying "We might double all of our chains/blocks but we really have no idea how to do this if the entire world gets onboard"

You can find these numbers pretty easily as a lot has been written about this. Number of visa transactions for instance is orders of magnitude more than bitcoin currently.
The original vision for bitcoin (as described in the white paper) held that the block size should increase to accommodate transactions. The author believed technology and nodes would evolve to make it work. Ultimately, there will be many different cryptocurrencies with different strengths to make it work I think.

There are cryptos with a central authority as well (Ethereum, Zcash). Bitcoin saw a decentralized system as a founding strength (I agree). Central authorities are great until they aren't. Consensus can be messy. Just look at the US Congress.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Bitcoin continues to bubble(?) up.  A few recent developments...  Square a payments processor for small companies is experimenting with helping merchants accept bitcoin for merchandise. I expect they will provide some facility for conversion to dollars .

Another bitcoin development is one of the major futures exchanges (in Chicago I think) is considering securities related to bitcoin...  They plan to find some way to reduce the high bitcoin volatility but I'm not sure how (that is what market makers do).

Coincidentally the stock market is unusually (scarily) low volatility... I am worried that all the money coming into passive stock indexes is reducing the qualitative rigor of individuals picking stocks... this means weak stocks will get boosted by the momentum, and good stocks averaged back into the mix... 

Of course if i really understood the important market moving factors I'd be posting this from my beach house on oahu, not Hickory, MS.  :

JR

 

[Script]

...the whole crypto-vs-fiat thing...

Is a parody in itself. From a wider perspective, how is Bitcoin not 'fiat' ?

We see Bitcoins split into Bitcoin cash, Bitcoin gold... so the much touted idea of an upper ceiling (only that many Bitcoins can be produced in total) is already thwarted. I think I mentioned this some time ago. Anyway, how about Bitcoin  silver, Bitcoin paladium, Bitcoin cacao, Bitcoin orange juice, Bitcoin sides of pork? Next big split has been postponed for now, if I understood correctly.

With that many cryptocurrencies now 'out there' what we effectively see is a return of high-yield currency exchange speculation... Proponents might claim that's 'only' because Bitcoins got 'corrupted' by capitalism... well, I for my part have always thought its part of the Bitcoin 'system'.

The technology is interesting/promising though.

 

[Tubetec]

Huge drugs bust here in Ireland in the last week ,maybe the biggest drugs cartel in the country was found to have a Bitcoin farm to facillitate their dirty business . I know little or nothing about crypto's ,but it does seem like the perfect vehicle for gangsters to wash dirty money.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Is a parody in itself. From a wider perspective, how is Bitcoin not 'fiat' ?

We see Bitcoins split into Bitcoin cash, Bitcoin gold... so the much touted idea of an upper ceiling (only that many Bitcoins can be produced in total) is already thwarted. I think I mentioned this some time ago. Anyway, how about Bitcoin  silver, Bitcoin paladium, Bitcoin cacao, Bitcoin orange juice, Bitcoin sides of pork? Next big split has been postponed for now, if I understood correctly.

With that many cryptocurrencies now 'out there' what we effectively see is a return of high-yield currency exchange speculation... Proponents might claim that's 'only' because Bitcoins got 'corrupted' by capitalism... well, I for my part have always thought its part of the Bitcoin 'system'.

The technology is interesting/promising though.

The block chain technology is being widely embraced by the banking system to reduce transaction cost, bitcoin not so much...

JR

 

[dmp]

From a wider perspective, how is Bitcoin not 'fiat' ?

No central authority , i.e. no government giving it value by order or decree.

We see Bitcoins split into Bitcoin cash, Bitcoin gold... so the much touted idea of an upper ceiling (only that many Bitcoins can be produced in total) is already thwarted.

This is an interesting point. The bitcoin splits plus all the other cryptocurrencies (500+) are competing for attention and users/investors.  Yet, the prices are still going up.
I don't know enough about macroeconomics to answer it.  However, it is not distinct from fiat currencies -  the USD competes with the Euro, Yen, Yuan, etc...  Do other country's money supply impact the United States money supply? If Japan continues to print money while the USA tapers, what will it mean for US inflation, etc.? It's all interrelated now.

The current status of cryptocurrencies is that they are still in infancy. value is growing exponentially as people learn and buy into them. Kind of like the internet in 1996. Few were really using it at the time, some saw the potential, but "the internet" was well known enough at the time that everyone had an opinion about it (and a lot of opinion's were negative / bearish).
Having lived through that period, I remember it, but it's perhaps not known by younger people that it was that way. Anyone remember what industry first showed that profitable business could run on the internet?  porn.  This seems to have been pretty much forgotten by history.

 

[JohnRoberts]

No central authority , i.e. no government giving it value by order or decree.
This is an interesting point. The bitcoin splits plus all the other cryptocurrencies (500+) are competing for attention and users/investors.  Yet, the prices are still going up.
I don't know enough about macroeconomics to answer it.  However, it is not distinct from fiat currencies -  the USD competes with the Euro, Yen, Yuan, etc...  Do other country's money supply impact the United States money supply? If Japan continues to print money while the USA tapers, what will it mean for US inflation, etc.? It's all interrelated now.

I am not sure if this is what you are saying but yes QE (quantitative easing) is fungible so flows easily across national borders and while the US has been tightening for some time, other nations are still easing, buoying world securities markets.  This is both good and bad, we'll see which.

The jury is still out on whether we can pull back all the QE we pumped in and realize a soft landing, but for now other nations that appear later than us in the recent cycle still have their foot on the gas... 

The current status of cryptocurrencies is that they are still in infancy. value is growing exponentially as people learn and buy into them. Kind of like the internet in 1996. Few were really using it at the time, some saw the potential, but "the internet" was well known enough at the time that everyone had an opinion about it (and a lot of opinion's were negative / bearish).
Having lived through that period, I remember it, but it's perhaps not known by younger people that it was that way. Anyone remember what industry first showed that profitable business could run on the internet?  porn.  This seems to have been pretty much forgotten by history.

Bubbles are often forgotten or ignored even by people who lived through them (it's different this time trust me... ) .

I suspect early enough investors in bitcoin will do OK... The last ones in,  not so much...

Yes on the technology, no on the currency as a store of value. (But I own some gold so what do I know?  : )

Bitcoin is probably a great speculative investment for young people to buy a few (several years ago) and hide in a sock drawer for a few decades.  The fundamental premise that they would never expand the amount of bitcoin seems almost constantly under attack by different bitcoin factions trying to make it more practical for small transactions.

It is interesting which is why I follow it, but I don't own any.  Etherium sounds a little more practical, but still nah...  Now square may be an indirect way to play it.

JR

 

[Andy Peters]

No central authority , i.e. no government giving it value by order or decree.

Instead, "the market" decides its value, as measured against ... other currencies.

This is an interesting point. The bitcoin splits plus all the other cryptocurrencies (500+) are competing for attention and users/investors.  Yet, the prices are still going up.

The current status of cryptocurrencies is that they are still in infancy. value is growing exponentially as people learn and buy into them.

It seems to me that Bitcoin is less a currency than simply an investment vehicle. That is, nobody is buying and selling anything with Bitcoins, because there's the assumption that its value will only increase. Why buy a pizza with Bitcoin when next month, next year the Bitcoins you spent on the pizza will be double or triple their value?

It has all the signs of a classic bubble.

 

[Script]

Central authority

Nations respectively national central banks practicing QE don't do it independently from one another.

Versus

Who decides when and whether Bitcoin splits? Were the splits democratic or divisive?

 

[dmp]

It seems to me that Bitcoin is less a currency than simply an investment vehicle. That is, nobody is buying and selling anything with Bitcoins, because there's the assumption that its value will only increase. Why buy a pizza with Bitcoin when next month, next year the Bitcoins you spent on the pizza will be double or triple their value?

It has all the signs of a classic bubble.

Maybe it's not about small transactions like buying coffee. Just because you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Want to get your life savings out of Venezuela? China? Greece? Want to put ten million USD in to a secure vault that only you know about? Want to send a lot of money somewhere (anywhere in the world) with trivial transaction fees and privacy?  People say a $5 transaction fee is going to destroy bitcoin. Not if you're sending the equivalent of 10 million USD.
I read a comment by someone (forget who) about how bubbles occur when people get really excited about something, as a new disruptive technology.
I think there is a lot of excitement, but that there is also a lot of utility value in crypto currencies. The market price is what people are willing to spend on it. It will only be a bubble if it decreases significantly. Time will tell.

I am much more confident that the stock market is in a bubble right now than cryptos.

 

[dmp]

Nations respectively national central banks practicing QE don't do it independently from one another.

Versus

Who decides when and whether Bitcoin splits? Were the splits democratic or divisive?

Anyone can 'split'. All you do is tweak the node software so the blocks are different than the main chain and start running it. Once you've added incompatible blocks, you can no longer return to the old chain. It's only a noticeable split if a lot of people follow the fork.
Theoretically, if it splits and everyone's previous holdings exist on both chains, like btc (bitcoin) and bch (bitcoin cash), the market value should decrease in half. For instance a stock split will usually have a market value that follows this.  Because it takes awhile for exchanges to start handling the new coin (like bch) there is a waiting period to get a real market value.
Before BCH, there was more uncertainty about splits, and a lot of pessimism. It turned out so well for holders, that now everyone is perhaps overly positive about it .  Ethereum had a split also a few years ago that didn't work out as well, but both coins still exist.
The BTC and BCH split was really good since it gave big blockers and small blockers and option. They could quit fighting and go there separate ways.

 

[malnatim]

i'm happy to have some bitcoin. but i was shocked to learn how much electricity a  transaction requires. this seems like it maybe bitcoin's greatest flaw.

"The electricity required for a single bitcoin trade could power a house for a whole month."
http://uk.businessinsider.com/electricity-required-for-single-bitcoin-trade-could-power-a-house-for-a-month-2017-10

"Bitcoin Could Consume as Much Electricity as Denmark by 2020"
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/aek3za/bitcoin-could-consume-as-much-electricity-as-denmark-by-2020

 

[dmp]

Although a lot of electricity is being used, it is not "required"

Miners are competing for the next block and the reward that goes with it. The more computers they run, the better their chances of getting the right hash. The higher the price, the more economic incentive to run nodes.

I wonder how much electricity the finance conglomerates use to extract money from the rest of us?