You’re so noble.
1 Like
What prevalence? Name one major retailer that still accepts BTC. The only transactions occuring are between traders, and the underground. Take away the underground and the value goes poof!. This is their dirty little secret, but it’s all ‘okay’ because it’s distributed.
1 Like
LoL, better ban USD and gold next. This is wildly entertaining.
3 Likes
C’mon Zen, if your going to use such argument as a counterpoint, how about incorporating some intelligence in it next time. I don’t need to explain how your comment is not comparative.
Please, do explain the logic of your comment above.
2 Likes
Dude doesn’t even know proper word usage. You expect them to explain something logically?
1 Like
Guy is uninformed yet highly opinionated on the topic. Just ignore.
1 Like
Fake news! Fake news! Fake news!
My posts prove otherwise.
I toed the line by swearing above. This is just uncalled for.
3 Likes
Then have a constructive factual debate showing me how anything I have said is not true and not already proven true by academia and the press.
You just told me to go kill myself… Yet you want a constructive debate? You don’t deserve a constructive debate. You deserve a ban.
5 Likes
Okay, so you can’t defend your position. I’ll go back to my original claim that u are 100% complicit
I have zero desire to defend any position, around any topic, to you. You’ve proven to be a worthless addition to the forum in this one thread alone. Enjoy your lonely existence. Try meetup.com–maybe you can find some friends.
1 Like
Im not looking for ‘friends’. If my posts make people think twice before buying crypto then I’ve done my job.
I’ll bite. But in turn, you have to respond to my argument, and point out specific flaws in logic or assumption of fact, not just make some conclusory statement or distort my argument. I’m not saying there aren’t arguments for the other side, however making an argument for your side is unlikely to refute my argument.
The topic of bitcoins is more prevalent today as a result of speculators. The discussion of bitcoins on major news outlets increases its prevalence in everyday society. Major news outlets are talking and writing about bitcoin on a daily basis. Therefore, as a result of the major news outlets, the prevalence is bitcoin is higher than it would otherwise be.
The major news outlets are discussing bitcoin as a result of speculators. Speculators drive the drastic price changes in bitcoin. Major news outlets started talking about bitcoin consistently as a result of the large increases in a short period of time and they continue talking about bitcoin as a result of the drastic swings. Therefore, speculators have caused major news outlets to discuss and continue discussing bitcoin.
Because major news outlets discussing bitcoin on a daily basis increases the prevalence of bitcoin in everyday society and speculators have caused major news outlets to discuss bitcoin on a daily basis, speculators have caused an increase in the prevalence of bitcoin in everyday society.
100% agree. But that doesn’t make it normalized.
With objective arguments, I think what Summer goes on about is the fundamental need for cryptocurrencies. Forget about speculation-induced pricing and so called investing or any profits derived from those activities in a transitory period like currently. But long term, what is fundamentally different about Cryptocurrencies that we need them? Assume for this exercise that they become government-regulated, less volatile, and more secure.
-
Aren’t they just another form of fiat currency (like most country-specific ones) except backed by even less collateral than the USD and other country currencies which value reflect their economies?
-
Talking about legal transactions, aren’t current legal transactions based on regular banking vehicles efficient enough for our needs? I can already use my phone or credit card to buy whatever I want nearly anywhere so much so that I don’t need to have cash on hand in 95+% of my current transactions and the way cryptocurrencies operate, I don’t see the difference with existing P2P payment options either.
-
If you factor in the large energy consumption to mine cryptos, the weak security around them, the indirect impact on industries relying on chips (ASIC or GPU related) that could be better used for other tasks, what fundamental benefit do cryptos offer vs. traditional fiat currencies? (I’m not talking about gold since it has intrinsic value as a commodity too)
The block-chain concept is very interesting as a proof of concept for this experiment but that’s about it. Outside of it - and outside of current get rich quick schemes-, the current justification for cryptocurrencies relies a little bit much on illegal activities (money laundering, non-traceability of income, no government oversight, purchase of illegal goods and services) compared to other things they may bring to the table.
3 Likes
Y’all need to take a chill pill and stop disrespecting each other.
Summer isn’t wrong – most transactions are from illegal activities and speculators.
I incorrectly assumed that Overstock was only using bitcoin as an intermediary, but apparently they are only converting 50% of BTC payments back to USD and holding on to the rest (which isn’t a lot – a few coins per week [source]). It’s interesting, but IMO this is also speculation on their part.
2 Likes
I think a common misconception is that the whole crypto market is just about replacing fiat. See my previous post for more info:
This may be true if you’re a citizen of a developed country, with good credit. This is not nearly as true if you’re in a developing country or are otherwise not well-represented by the banking system.
One of the important uses of cryptos as a currency is giving people global freedom with their assets, when they may otherwise be at the whim of a government that may not always be looking after their best interests. This is especially true of 3rd world countries with a poorly-maintained local currency, but is also relevant to places like China and Cyprus when their capital controls get out of hand.
Large energy consumption is not an inherent feature of cryptos. Many are increasingly using a Proof of Stake (PoS) methodology to avoid this. Ethereum, for example, plans to switch to PoS eventually.
Weak security is only a factor of the newness and rapid growth of the technology. Ultimately, the technology has the potential for far greater security than standard banking systems.
“Better use” is totally subjective. If there’s ultimately a great use-case for cryptos that justifies the use of these chips, then the market deems them worth it. And this is also alleviated by switching to PoS.
2 Likes