4 ms·

What does 'a strong fundamental' mean? A global payment system which is faster than a wire transfer. An uncorrelated hedge for assets. P2P payment. Things like

What does 'a strong fundamental' mean? A global payment system which is faster than a wire transfer. An uncorrelated hedge for assets. P2P payment. Things like that?

trevyn 9y ago
A different (more modern?) cryptocurrency could serve all of those needs, which is a threat to the fundamental value of Bitcoin. For comparison, the "fundamental" value of USD is a trust in the US Government to maintain its value. Comparing that to the fundamental value of Bitcoin would be a fun discussion to have, but the fact remains that the US has done it for 225 years and Bitcoin has done it for less than 9 years. Actually, by that reasoning, I guess the fundamental value of Bitcoin is the distributed self-interest and capability of Bitcoin holders to maintain Bitcoin's value, which is obviously a powerful force.
- discombobulate 9y ago
  Like I said, I stay on the ball. I'm not going to lay out my investment thesis here.
  - trevyn 9y ago
    But the point is that a "strong fundamental" means that there is a widespread long-term belief in whatever backs the currency. Bitcoin is too new to have this in human timescales. Can you make money speculating in Bitcoin? Obviously. But it is not fundamentally backed by something that people have long-term trust in -- it is only worth what you can trade it for at that moment.
    - discombobulate 9y ago
      I trust cryptography & networks. I've lived a large part of my life on networks. Never talked to a politician.
- hackinthebochs 9y ago
  >A different (more modern?) cryptocurrency could serve all of those needs People always underestimate the power of network effects. People have been predicting the demise of facebook for the last decade. Surely something better will come along at eat its lunch, right? Wrong. Network effects are and always will be king.
  - omarchowdhury 9y ago
    Why haven't network effects brought to Bitcoin mass adoption already, then? The very nature of network effects is that they are an accelerant for adoption, why hasn't this happened? It's been 8 years.
    - hackinthebochs 9y ago
      Network effects isn't about adoption necessarily, its about defense. If a cryptocurrency is going to be mainstream, it will be bitcoin barring some massive self-inflicted wound or some new game changing technology. But adoption hasn't reached critical mass because there are still many usability barriers. Hopefully with segwit we'll start to see those barriers fall away.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    - hackinthebochs 9y ago
      Network effects isn't about adoption necessarily, its about defense. If a cryptocurrency is going to be mainstream, it will be bitcoin barring some massive self-inflicted wound or some new game changing technology. But adoption hasn't reached critical mass because there are still many technical barriers. Hopefully with segwit we'll start to see those barriers fall away.
- ric2b 9y ago
  > but the fact remains that the US has done it for 225 years and Bitcoin has done it for less than 9 years. The USD was backed by gold until Nixon, you can only count the last 40 something years against Bitcoin's 9.
  - trevyn 9y ago
    The USD was backed by your trust in the government to give you its gold upon demand, not an intrinsic ability to physically convert a note into gold, so nothing really changed with Nixon. Mind blown, right? :)

What does 'a strong fundamental' mean? A global payment system which is faster than a wire transfer. An uncorrelated hedge for assets. P2P payment. Things like that?

trevyn 9y ago

A different (more modern?) cryptocurrency could serve all of those needs, which is a threat to the fundamental value of Bitcoin. For comparison, the "fundamental" value of USD is a trust in the US Government to maintain its value. Comparing that to the fundamental value of Bitcoin would be a fun discussion to have, but the fact remains that the US has done it for 225 years and Bitcoin has done it for less than 9 years. Actually, by that reasoning, I guess the fundamental value of Bitcoin is the distributed self-interest and capability of Bitcoin holders to maintain Bitcoin's value, which is obviously a powerful force.

discombobulate 9y ago
Like I said, I stay on the ball. I'm not going to lay out my investment thesis here.
- trevyn 9y ago
  But the point is that a "strong fundamental" means that there is a widespread long-term belief in whatever backs the currency. Bitcoin is too new to have this in human timescales. Can you make money speculating in Bitcoin? Obviously. But it is not fundamentally backed by something that people have long-term trust in -- it is only worth what you can trade it for at that moment.
  - discombobulate 9y ago
    I trust cryptography & networks. I've lived a large part of my life on networks. Never talked to a politician.
hackinthebochs 9y ago
>A different (more modern?) cryptocurrency could serve all of those needs People always underestimate the power of network effects. People have been predicting the demise of facebook for the last decade. Surely something better will come along at eat its lunch, right? Wrong. Network effects are and always will be king.
- omarchowdhury 9y ago
  Why haven't network effects brought to Bitcoin mass adoption already, then? The very nature of network effects is that they are an accelerant for adoption, why hasn't this happened? It's been 8 years.
  - hackinthebochs 9y ago
    Network effects isn't about adoption necessarily, its about defense. If a cryptocurrency is going to be mainstream, it will be bitcoin barring some massive self-inflicted wound or some new game changing technology. But adoption hasn't reached critical mass because there are still many usability barriers. Hopefully with segwit we'll start to see those barriers fall away.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - hackinthebochs 9y ago
    Network effects isn't about adoption necessarily, its about defense. If a cryptocurrency is going to be mainstream, it will be bitcoin barring some massive self-inflicted wound or some new game changing technology. But adoption hasn't reached critical mass because there are still many technical barriers. Hopefully with segwit we'll start to see those barriers fall away.
ric2b 9y ago
> but the fact remains that the US has done it for 225 years and Bitcoin has done it for less than 9 years. The USD was backed by gold until Nixon, you can only count the last 40 something years against Bitcoin's 9.
- trevyn 9y ago
  The USD was backed by your trust in the government to give you its gold upon demand, not an intrinsic ability to physically convert a note into gold, so nothing really changed with Nixon. Mind blown, right? :)