Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I agree with you. Let me explain - I think you have to separate bitcoin, the protocol and bitcoins, the currency. Secondly, if you separate the two functions of bitcoins as a storage of value and bitcoins as a currency, it might make more sense. After each of the last three big crashes, the price built a new base at twice the initial level before the bust and then beat the original high in a relatively short amount of time. This has been going on for 3 years now. If I want to save some money that I can afford to lose potentially, with the main rational that it cannot be inflated long term and can "forget" about (so I don't lose sleep over the fluctuations) now I found a secure home for capital that I don't want to touch. It took a long time for me to develop that confidence (I daytraded in the past, esp. penny stocks, so "supernovas" are not something new). Now, if (the big question of course) bitcoin as a currency continues to be adopted, a bitcoin will be unaffordable and most trading will be in the μBTC etc range we could see it stabilize due to the sheer volume of participants. However, even if that would never be the case, bitcoin as a protocol could lead to innovations in the entire supply chain that make transactions of raw material all the way up to product pricing instantaneous.


Confidence is a funny word for gambling. Secure an odd choice for something defined as volatile. If you need money and your bitcoin savings is worthless, you lose.

Volume of participants has had no stabilizing effect on bitcoins. They suffer in spades the destabilizing properties of real currency, with no corresponding 'federal reserve' able to (try to) control fluctuations.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: