my bitcoins gone down...

[subtona]

Originally Posted by powerfunk

BTC transactions only take a few minutes and there's never any question of "where" the money is,...


I can only note that cash loses half its value every 15-25 years.

There is always a possibility of user error, like tossing the drive by accident etc... garbage in garbage out. I am capable of frequent user error in all sorts of things, i wouldn't expect this thing to be any different.

Do i understand correctly, if sent in error, there is no possibility retrieving?

Of course cash can be lost as well.



As far as cash losings its value,yeah, bummer

[mannyv11]

Over the last week or so wasn't there like a 40k heist done to the bitcoins largest "vault" or whatever it's called?

Since it's not really FDIC insured (lol) I think i will be staying away. I lose enough money as it is, I don't need thief's stealing it and having no recourse of getting it back.

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by subtona

There is always a possibility of user error, like tossing the drive by accident etc.

There are lots of ways to back up your wallet, and there's no reason you couldn't have your keys saved redundantly on several different drives, or even backed up on Dropbox/Google Drive/Carbonite. I actually have a printed piece of paper in my safe deposit box with the QR code on it needed to redeem my bitcoins (this is called a "paper wallet"). The "what if I throw out my hard drive" concern has been overstated IMO.

Originally Posted by subtona

Do i understand correctly, if sent in error, there is no possibility retrieving?

Yes, once you send BTC you can't undo it. So, if you typed in the wrong recipient address, that's that. That's one reason why there's such huge opportunity right now for someone to come along and iPhone-ify BTC transactions. Bitcoin is a great technology, and it's complicated-- but there's no reason someone can't develop a user-facing app that makes the experience simpler. If/when a trusted company makes it easy for non-geeks to send/receive BTC just by knowing someone's email address, then that'll be a good day for cryptocurrency.

[shnxx]

I don't know what people thought of PayPal or VISA when they first came along but I'm certain some people preferred cash initially.

Many people working in financial services companies such as the ones above or the mobile payment divisions in banks are keeping a close eye on crypto currencies (according to an executive from Citibank).

Clearly btc is not ready for wide adoption yet but that's why there are venture capital-backed startups looking to change that.

People like Peter thiel (who helped start many tech companies like paypal) and Andreessen Horowitz (invested in companies like Skype, Instagram, groupon etc) are invested in bitcoin related startups.

If I were a billionaire I would also be investing in these startups; but since I'm not, I just have a few bitcoin for a speculative high risk investment :)

I'm okay with risky investments if the size of the position is small.
Losing a few btc worth of money isn't worth losing sleep over.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by powerfunk

There are lots of ways to back up your wallet, and there's no reason you couldn't have your keys saved redundantly on several different drives, or even backed up on Dropbox/Google Drive/Carbonite. I actually have a printed piece of paper in my safe deposit box with the QR code on it needed to redeem my bitcoins (this is called a "paper wallet"). The "what if I throw out my hard drive" concern has been overstated IMO.


Yes, once you send BTC you can't undo it. So, if you typed in the wrong recipient address, that's that. That's one reason why there's such huge opportunity right now for someone to come along and iPhone-ify BTC transactions. Bitcoin is a great technology, and it's complicated-- but there's no reason someone can't develop a user-facing app that makes the experience simpler. If/when a trusted company makes it easy for non-geeks to send/receive BTC just by knowing someone's email address, then that'll be a good day for cryptocurrency.

Ok the back up system seems to have enough protections available. Provided they are made use of and executed properly by the consumer?


Here is an example of how my current system works, do you see bitcoin or crypto, offering as much confidence/ protection to the consumer?

I dont use debit cards, why would i want to expose my personal funds so casually to any possibility of being misused.

I use my credit card in person or via phone or internet, no difference.
I have on line banking set up with the exact establishment the credit card is distributed from, i got this exact establishment while searching through the banks vetted list of the same.

So i charge something, a few weeks later i get a bill, i look it over & if all good, i pay it via banks website.
Or
I look over my CC statement, dont like it, notify the credit card company & im done, no loss or liability on my end and more importantly, no inconvenience relating to the use of my funds, while the credit card company sorts out their problem, I simply use a different CC.

I haven't experienced any bank failures ever where my account has been affected. (Fdic insurance gives me no confidence)

Concern is, is that level of distance & protection available with crypto?
If not, then i cant see it competing in this specific area, ie the average consumers day to day...not saying this is its intent, just walking myself through the steps.

Of course there are many other arenas for the development & use of crypto, i am beginning to see it a bit clearer thanks in large part to the brilliant discussion here

My final thought is this, at this moment, with the current system, we have very strong protections in place...using the new concepts, it seems like consumers will be voluntarily giving up a significant layer of that protection...
if someone agrees to make themselves more vulnerable, i have to conclude they are risking because there is a potential for greater gains? Why would anyone choose to remove that layer of protection? I can think of reasons, but many of them lead down unscrupulous roads?


Perhaps i can be used as a litmus test for the average consumer? Somewhere between a piss & vinegar college kid & my aging parents.
I am not in banking nor finance, to be honest my overall math skills are poor...i have owned an apple computer since they were a little gray box called Macintosh and my mom worked for bank of america during the development of the product "Bank of Americard" now known as Visa.... I guess these things just to say i appreciate innovation ... Sorry for being so long winded

[shnxx]

Originally Posted by subtona

Ok the back up system seems to have enough protections available. Provided they are made use of and executed properly by the consumer?


Here is an example of how my current system works, do you see bitcoin or crypto, offering as much confidence/ protection to the consumer?

I dont use debit cards, why would i want to expose my personal funds so casually to any possibility of being misused.

I use my credit card in person or via phone or internet, no difference.
I have on line banking set up with the exact establishment the credit card is distributed from, i got this exact establishment while searching through the banks vetted list of the same.

So i charge something, a few weeks later i get a bill, i look it over & if all good, i pay it via banks website.
Or
I look over my CC statement, dont like it, notify the credit card company & im done, no loss or liability on my end and more importantly, no inconvenience relating to the use of my funds, while the credit card company sorts out their problem, I simply use a different CC.

I haven't experienced any bank failures ever where my account has been affected. (Fdic insurance gives me no confidence)

Concern is, is that level of distance & protection available with crypto?
If not, then i cant see it competing in this specific area, ie the average consumers day to day...not saying this is its intent, just walking myself through the steps.

Of course there are many other arenas for the development & use of crypto, i am beginning to see it a bit clearer thanks in large part to the brilliant discussion here

My final thought is this, at this moment, with the current system, we have very strong protections in place...using the new concepts, it seems like consumers will be voluntarily giving up a significant layer of that protection...
if someone agrees to make themselves more vulnerable, i have to conclude they are risking because there is a potential for greater gains? Why would anyone choose to remove that layer of protection? I can think of reasons, but many of them lead down unscrupulous roads?


Perhaps i can be used as a litmus test for the average consumer? Somewhere between a piss & vinegar college kid & my aging parents.
I am not in banking nor finance, to be honest my overall math skills are poor...i have owned an apple computer since they were a little gray box called Macintosh and my mom worked for bank of america during the development of the product "Bank of Americard" now known as Visa.... I guess these things just to say i appreciate innovation ... Sorry for being so long winded

Wow you are a careful person! I should be more careful with debit cards too.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by shnxx

Wow you are a careful person! I should be more careful with debit cards too.

i know i was wordy but for the most part,

i believe what i described to be a typical system, perhaps used by most of us?… as it is, it is effective at offering the protection of the consumer at the banks expense… perhaps big business would benefit quite a bit if everyone was solely responsible for their own losses?

i can't begin to speak about the potential down side a bank would see if everyone decided to use a crypto like currency? but as stated previously, if transactions can now be done for free vs a "6-cent transaction (mining) fee" vig for Bitcoin, in the long term, what would be the offset for the average person?



I understand the average person may not be the target market, but ultimately i have to believe that the system would have their sights on having the option of including everyone rather than eliminating such a large demographic?

[HL65]

Originally Posted by subtona

i know i was wordy but for the most part,

i believe what i described to be a typical system, perhaps used by most of us?… as it is, it is effective at offering the protection of the consumer at the banks expense… perhaps big business would benefit quite a bit if everyone was solely responsible for their own losses?

i can't begin to speak about the potential down side a bank would see if everyone decided to use a crypto like currency? but as stated previously, if transactions can now be done for free vs a "6-cent transaction (mining) fee" vig for Bitcoin, in the long term, what would be the offset for the average person?



I understand the average person may not be the target market, but ultimately i have to believe that the system would benefit from having the option of including everyone rather than eliminating such a large demographic?

Gus: The main question one should ask is not one about saving money per transaction but does one want wild volatility and instability in their cash instruments. This isn't about using a Paypal or a mechanism to move currency from one place to another. Any cash substitute or currency that swings like this has is clearly not a viable option for 99% of the population. It is much more of a speculators game right now. Now if it was to show signs of long term stability and actually be an alternative currency option comparable to dollars that would be a different story.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by SteelerFan65

Gus: The main question one should ask is not one about saving money per transaction but does one want wild volatility and instability in their cash instruments. This isn't about using a Paypal or a mechanism to move currency from one place to another. Any cash substitute or currency that swings like this has is clearly not a viable option for 99% of the population. It is much more of a speculators game right now. Now if it was to show signs of long term stability and actually be an alternative currency option comparable to dollars that would be a different story.

Ken, thanks absolutely agree 100%, it does not have any appeal in the state that it is in, nor do i dabble in things of its nature

i guess im just intrigued with the idea of the potential of a universal "facebook" of currency?

although this is way out of my wheelhouse, i am very much enjoying all ends of the dialogue on the topic for sure…

[shnxx]

The way transactions are being designed by companies like bitpay, I believe the volatility will not be felt by either party, since the seller would receive the money in dollars. Bitpay would help convert the buyer's bitcoin into dollars.

[DiamondJack]

If you look up the definition of currency, it will say "a system of money in general use in a particular country".

By definition therefore Bitcoins are not a currency since they are not in general use.

The whole system was designed to resemble a natural resource such as gold or any other precious metal.......hence terminology like mining and the fact there will only ever be a certain number in circulation.......

So they are more akin to a commodity to speculate on if you wish to..... But buyer beware as unlike gold there is no actual substance to them and if a competitor creates a more popular version (most likely to be a Government run crypto currency in time) or there is a flaw in the system, or a pump and dump strategy from the creators and early investors, this could lead to your bit wallet being worth about the same as your solitary hard drive on the second hand market.......

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by DiamondJack

If you look up the definition of currency, it will say "a system of money in general use in a particular country".

By definition therefore Bitcoins are not a currency since they are not in general use.

The whole system was designed to resemble a natural resource such as gold or any other precious metal.......hence terminology like mining and the fact there will only ever be a certain number in circulation.......

So they are more akin to a commodity to speculate on if you wish to..... But buyer beware as unlike gold there is no actual substance to them and if a competitor creates a more popular version (most likely to be a Government run crypto currency in time) or there is a flaw in the system, or a pump and dump strategy from the creators and early investors, this could lead to your bit wallet being worth about the same as your solitary hard drive on the second hand market.......

The question is how much speculation uplift is there left in a "coin" that was originally 1c and now hovers around the $500 mark with wild fluctuations in either direction.

I see the speculation energy keeping the coin riding high as a finite source.

Gravity will win in the end, I reckon.

[Darlinboy]

What has roots as nobody sees,
Is taller than trees,
Up, up it goes,
And yet never grows?

[subtona]

Originally Posted by Darlinboy

What has roots as nobody sees,
Is taller than trees,
Up, up it goes,
And yet never grows?

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by DiamondJack

If you look up the definition of currency, it will say "a system of money in general use in a particular country". By definition therefore Bitcoins are not a currency

Another definition is "something that is used as money." Regardless, Merriam-Webster isn't gonna stop this socioeconomic revolution.

Originally Posted by DiamondJack

if a competitor creates a more popular version (most likely to be a Government run crypto currency in time) or there is a flaw in the system, or a pump and dump strategy from the creators and early investors, this could lead to your bit wallet being worth about the same as your solitary hard drive on the second hand market.......

In a way the "competing" cryptocurrencies effectively act as a testbed for Bitcoin. Smaller cryptos are able to risk trying different approaches/solutions to different problems, and developers can work the best aspects into future versions of Bitcoin. Maybe a more favored crypto will push BTC's price down, but it certainly won't push it to 0. Once a retailer accepts any form of cryptocurrency, it's trivial to accept another one -- so why wouldn't they at least take BTC? As a long-term holder of BTC I'm also not worried about fluctuations and "pump-and-dumps." The only thing that will push BTC's value to 0 is, as you mentioned, a flaw in the system. Five years in, the code has held up phenomenally well, though.

Originally Posted by subtona

as it is (the system) is effective at offering the protection of the consumer at the banks expense…

On the grander scale I would suggest the exact opposite is true.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by powerfunk

On the grander scale I would suggest the exact opposite is true.

I agree with you there but we would have apply that extreme example into both equations

[77T]

There are honest true believers pioneering BTC. However, there are also sinister forces dabbling in perverting it as well as any other form of currency that can be bent to unsavory purposes.

And that will likely continue...

[HL65]

20% decline in Bitcoins value overnight...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101442439

Nothing like stability in price of a currency as far as I am concerned.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by SteelerFan65

20% decline in Bitcoins value overnight...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101442439

Nothing like stability in price of a currency as far as I am concerned.

Uh-oh

[mannyv11]

gotta love a 350 million dollar hack going on for a year that the company didn't even notice. Seems real secure to me!

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by SteelerFan65

20% decline in Bitcoins value overnight...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101442439

Nothing like stability in price of a currency as far as I am concerned.

20% decline in 10 hours.

Your cash would devalue the same in 220,000 hours (25 years) so that's the same.


..... unless of course it was attracting interest similar to the inflation rate.

Then notsomuch.

[77T]

This unattributed leak about the Mt. Gox meltdown also appeared mysteriously:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/209050732/...Strategy-Draft

The poster stayed anonymous, but Wired Magazine claims is was posted by Ryan Selkis, a bitcoin entrepreneur and blogger.
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise...-gox-implodes/

Methinks it is very easy to manipulate BC with public "social engineering" as well as software hacks. The charts show how unattributed and potentially fraudulent stories can kill value.

[77T]

BTW, Forbes also is reporting on the issue:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygree...-hack-rumored/

[subtona]

Ever fascinating saga of Bitcoin

I was recently in a cigar shop with a mixed clientele, as is usual to find there, when i brought up bitcoin, i was surprised to find out 9 of 10 were familiar with it and 1 of them said they have been trading it.

[psv]

Bitcoin is like Napster. The idea has commercial value, but the current system is not the right now.

To my simple mind, this is all about speculation at this point. Adreline-junkies and gamblers looking to make a quick buck.

I prefer putting my money into building something meaningful.

[powerfunk]

Mt. Gox has been a joke for a long time. For the past couple weeks there has even been a subcommunity of "gox account traders" buying and selling Gox accounts for a fraction of their stated balance. Their insolvency is hardly a surprise.

Mt. Gox hasn't been a leading player in the BTC world ever since BTC got serious. Yet without fail, every article still calls them the "once-largest" bitcoin exchange to make it seem like a bigger deal than it is. Still, I thought the final collapse of Gox might push the price under $400 but it seems to be holding strong over $500.

If you're only going to hold BTC for a few minutes, the risk of volatility really is tiny anyway. The average business can accept BTC at current rates, automatically sell them at current exchange rates, and receive fiat currency. Thus, to the average business the "spot price" of BTC is pretty irrelevant, unless they intend to hold some of the BTC they receive. Only true believers with high risk appetites should hold BTC long-term, but I think it's a great medium of exchange for anyone.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by SteelerFan65

20% decline in Bitcoins value overnight...

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101442439

Nothing like stability in price of a currency as far as I am concerned.

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

20% decline in 10 hours.

Your cash would devalue the same in 220,000 hours (25 years) so that's the same.


..... unless of course it was attracting interest similar to the inflation rate.

Then notsomuch.

When I woke up this morning the $20 I left on my dresser didn't change to $15 overnight...it was still $20

Common sense tells you that anytime you mess with crypto currency there's a huge chance to get burned. You might not, but the chance of it is greater.

[Darlinboy]

Renowned expert comments on BitCoin...

"It’s a Zero Sum game – somebody wins, somebody loses. Bitcoin itself isn’t lost or made, it’s simply transferred – from one perception to another. Like magic."

[codecow]

In my opinion bitcoins should really only be mined at this point if you have access to an ASIC device with free power and free internet. Then it's completely free money to you and the volatility and other issues are not a concern.

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by codecow

In my opinion bitcoins should really only be mined at this point if you have access to an ASIC device with free power and free internet. Then it's completely free money to you and the volatility and other issues are not a concern.

Along those lines, I found this article interesting about people altcoin mining on Amazon servers after a guy wrote a decent program to mine on nvidia-based servers. The hourly spot price of Amazon EC2 web servers quickly evened out to the point where litecoin mining profitability approached 0. For a little while people were hashing with free Amazon cloud computing trials but they put a stop to that.