6 ms·

How often was Bitcoin called a Ponzi scheme? When it was at 50, at 100 or at 1,000? Always. If I look at my stock portfolio there are so many strange stocks an

How often was Bitcoin called a Ponzi scheme? When it was at 50, at 100 or at 1,000? Always. If I look at my stock portfolio there are so many strange stocks and funds I once invested in. They feel much more like Ponzi schemes or pump and dump, especially the riskier funds. If I look at my angel tickets into early stage ventures (done with FIAT) even worse. And if I look at the countless ICOs based on Ethereum, this is the real pump and dump Ponzi Disney Land. But Bitcoin? Seriously? I highly doubt that Bitcoin's founder or its early adopters intended Bitcoin as a Ponzi scheme.

lawn 9y ago
To be fair the developers of Bitcoin seem to have abandoned the original vision of Bitcoin, peer-to-peer digital cash, and has moved towards being purely a store of value. As transaction costs increase and Bitcoin's usefulness diminish it is becoming more and more like a ponzi scheme, a pyramid scheme or a game of greater fools. For what is the use of Bitcoin when other cryptocurrencies can be a store of value and peer-to-peer digital cash? I see none thus I see no value with Bitcoin.
- waytogo 9y ago
  > Bitcoin's usefulness diminish No, you mentioned it yourself: Bitcoin is a store of value. Moreover, it's one with a high liquidity, strong brand, limited supply, available in 180 countries, without banks involved and super reliable (gold doesn't have that features and please show me any other asset that has these features). So, it has a use and value. That it has evolved to this is no one's fault and btw this might change (the cash part) with the lightning network again. > more like a Ponzi scheme That would mean that all operators of Bitcoin, so everybody who is just investing or running local wallets with full nodes deliberately intend Bitcoin as a Ponzi scheme?? This is utter nonsense. If I launch an ICO tomorrow. Just a landing page and a BS white paper, you could allege that I deliberately plan my ICO/coin/token to be a Ponzi scheme. But you can't allege millions of BTC investors that they intend a Ponzi scheme eight years after this things started. Maybe you should check the definition of a Ponzi scheme again. However, do you own or did you ever own any BTC?
  - lawn 9y ago
    > No, you mentioned it yourself: Bitcoin is a store of value. Moreover, it's one with a high liquidity, strong brand, limited supply, available in 180 countries, without banks involved and super reliable (gold doesn't have that features and please show me any other asset that has these features). So, it has a use and value. I said Bitcoin's usefulness is diminishing by becoming less useful due to the high transaction time and price. Other coins are taking over the exact use case you're refering to. > Maybe you should check the definition of a Ponzi scheme again. It's more a greater fools game at this point and I only mentioned ponzi scheme as it was what I was responding to. > However, do you own or did you ever own any BTC? Yes I've owned and used BTC a while but recently stopped using it since it doesn't make sense for me anymore as it's too expensive.
    - waytogo 9y ago
      > I said Bitcoin's usefulness is diminishing by becoming less useful due to the high transaction time and price. If I want to store my assets I don't care about high transaction prices. > It's more a greater fools game at this point and I only mentioned ponzi scheme as it was what I was responding to. But you still used it in the wrong context. Bitcoin can't be a Ponzi scheme because the founder and the early adopters clearly didn't have this intent.
      - lawn 9y ago
        I guess you didn't address my main point: Why would Bitcoin be a sane store of value if other coins can fulfill the exact same niche while also being p2p digial cash? Why would you pay very high fees when you get the same features with a coin with very low fees? For now Bitcoin is valued higher and has better liquidity than other coins but with use cases quickly moving away from Bitcoin this is changing. The only thing Bitcoin has going for it by that point is FOMO and selling to greater fools.
        waytogo 9y ago
        You gave the answer yourself. Brand and popularity might change over time. But at the moment it is BTC. Just go to Google Trends and no other coin is that mainstream. The search volume for Bitcoin is 50% of 'iphone' which is massive itself. Re other coins: There are just two which are scalable because of their semi-central nature (XRP, XLM) but they have to get there first which will take time. The other millions of coins are usually decentral (and slow) tech and often they are shaky not working or don't have any own blockchains while valued in the billions (eg EOS). And you should not forget the upcoming lightning network for BTC. But why do I try to convince you, at the end of 2018 BTC is at 100K, you missed another opportunity and you come again here and tell us the same FUD.
- tambienben 9y ago
  The transaction costs will hopefully come down once Lightning Network is implemented.
  - UncleMeat 9y ago
    And be replaced by a user limit, even if people agree to use lightning transactions.
    - tambienben 9y ago
      Do you have a reference for that claim? This is the first I've heard of your scenario.
- baddox 9y ago
  Couldn’t the store of value thing just be temporary, while Bitcoin gets well-known? To be clear, I don’t think vanilla Bitcoin is very viable as a widely-used consumer-level p2p transaction system (like cash or credit cards), but I think the volatility and meteoric rises in price would have happened even if that were the case, simply because the value of such a network depends heavily on the number of people and organizations who know about it and trust it enough to use it. It’s a massive chicken and egg problem that would be faced by any currency or payment system that isn’t forced upon a population by a government.
  - lawn 9y ago
    > Couldn’t the store of value thing just be temporary, while Bitcoin gets well-known? Sure it's possible but we're already seeing a massive growth in altcoins which can actually be used for everyday payments while Bitcoin's relative marketcap is shrinking rapidly. For example Steam recently dropped Bitcoin support. BitPay, the payment processor Steam used, recently announced they will start supporting Bitcoin Cash (which have transfer fees of < $0.01) despite being Bitcoin maximalists until now. This is why I predict Bitcoin will be surpassed by other coins with more user adoption.
- runeks 9y ago
  > To be fair the developers of Bitcoin seem to have abandoned the original vision of Bitcoin, peer-to-peer digital cash, and has moved towards being purely a store of value. How, exactly, has this “original vision” been abandoned? By supporting a maximum block size?
  - lawn 9y ago
    By making it clear that being able to use Bitcoin to pay for stuff isn't prioritized. And yes forcing a 1MB blocksize totally destroys Bitcoin being usable as digital cash. When average and median fees are $30 - $100 it simply doesn't make sense.
    - waytogo 9y ago
      > destroys Bitcoin being usable as digital cash. So what? I value the use as store of value much higher than a cash system and I don't care if this was the initial use case. Go and find a better store of value (won't be easy) but it's easy to find another cash system (FIAT-based ones likes CCs or new upcoming ones like Stellar).
      - lawn 9y ago
        > Go and find a better store of value Monero is far superior as it's fungible and private. Bitcoin Cash is also technically the same as Bitcoin while being cheaper to use and by virtue of being actually useful as cash has more uses which helps price growth and liquidity.

lawn 9y ago

To be fair the developers of Bitcoin seem to have abandoned the original vision of Bitcoin, peer-to-peer digital cash, and has moved towards being purely a store of value. As transaction costs increase and Bitcoin's usefulness diminish it is becoming more and more like a ponzi scheme, a pyramid scheme or a game of greater fools. For what is the use of Bitcoin when other cryptocurrencies can be a store of value and peer-to-peer digital cash? I see none thus I see no value with Bitcoin.

waytogo 9y ago
> Bitcoin's usefulness diminish No, you mentioned it yourself: Bitcoin is a store of value. Moreover, it's one with a high liquidity, strong brand, limited supply, available in 180 countries, without banks involved and super reliable (gold doesn't have that features and please show me any other asset that has these features). So, it has a use and value. That it has evolved to this is no one's fault and btw this might change (the cash part) with the lightning network again. > more like a Ponzi scheme That would mean that all operators of Bitcoin, so everybody who is just investing or running local wallets with full nodes deliberately intend Bitcoin as a Ponzi scheme?? This is utter nonsense. If I launch an ICO tomorrow. Just a landing page and a BS white paper, you could allege that I deliberately plan my ICO/coin/token to be a Ponzi scheme. But you can't allege millions of BTC investors that they intend a Ponzi scheme eight years after this things started. Maybe you should check the definition of a Ponzi scheme again. However, do you own or did you ever own any BTC?
- lawn 9y ago
  > No, you mentioned it yourself: Bitcoin is a store of value. Moreover, it's one with a high liquidity, strong brand, limited supply, available in 180 countries, without banks involved and super reliable (gold doesn't have that features and please show me any other asset that has these features). So, it has a use and value. I said Bitcoin's usefulness is diminishing by becoming less useful due to the high transaction time and price. Other coins are taking over the exact use case you're refering to. > Maybe you should check the definition of a Ponzi scheme again. It's more a greater fools game at this point and I only mentioned ponzi scheme as it was what I was responding to. > However, do you own or did you ever own any BTC? Yes I've owned and used BTC a while but recently stopped using it since it doesn't make sense for me anymore as it's too expensive.
  - waytogo 9y ago
    > I said Bitcoin's usefulness is diminishing by becoming less useful due to the high transaction time and price. If I want to store my assets I don't care about high transaction prices. > It's more a greater fools game at this point and I only mentioned ponzi scheme as it was what I was responding to. But you still used it in the wrong context. Bitcoin can't be a Ponzi scheme because the founder and the early adopters clearly didn't have this intent.
    - lawn 9y ago
      I guess you didn't address my main point: Why would Bitcoin be a sane store of value if other coins can fulfill the exact same niche while also being p2p digial cash? Why would you pay very high fees when you get the same features with a coin with very low fees? For now Bitcoin is valued higher and has better liquidity than other coins but with use cases quickly moving away from Bitcoin this is changing. The only thing Bitcoin has going for it by that point is FOMO and selling to greater fools.
      - waytogo 9y ago
        You gave the answer yourself. Brand and popularity might change over time. But at the moment it is BTC. Just go to Google Trends and no other coin is that mainstream. The search volume for Bitcoin is 50% of 'iphone' which is massive itself. Re other coins: There are just two which are scalable because of their semi-central nature (XRP, XLM) but they have to get there first which will take time. The other millions of coins are usually decentral (and slow) tech and often they are shaky not working or don't have any own blockchains while valued in the billions (eg EOS). And you should not forget the upcoming lightning network for BTC. But why do I try to convince you, at the end of 2018 BTC is at 100K, you missed another opportunity and you come again here and tell us the same FUD.
tambienben 9y ago
The transaction costs will hopefully come down once Lightning Network is implemented.
- UncleMeat 9y ago
  And be replaced by a user limit, even if people agree to use lightning transactions.
  - tambienben 9y ago
    Do you have a reference for that claim? This is the first I've heard of your scenario.
baddox 9y ago
Couldn’t the store of value thing just be temporary, while Bitcoin gets well-known? To be clear, I don’t think vanilla Bitcoin is very viable as a widely-used consumer-level p2p transaction system (like cash or credit cards), but I think the volatility and meteoric rises in price would have happened even if that were the case, simply because the value of such a network depends heavily on the number of people and organizations who know about it and trust it enough to use it. It’s a massive chicken and egg problem that would be faced by any currency or payment system that isn’t forced upon a population by a government.
- lawn 9y ago
  > Couldn’t the store of value thing just be temporary, while Bitcoin gets well-known? Sure it's possible but we're already seeing a massive growth in altcoins which can actually be used for everyday payments while Bitcoin's relative marketcap is shrinking rapidly. For example Steam recently dropped Bitcoin support. BitPay, the payment processor Steam used, recently announced they will start supporting Bitcoin Cash (which have transfer fees of < $0.01) despite being Bitcoin maximalists until now. This is why I predict Bitcoin will be surpassed by other coins with more user adoption.
runeks 9y ago
> To be fair the developers of Bitcoin seem to have abandoned the original vision of Bitcoin, peer-to-peer digital cash, and has moved towards being purely a store of value. How, exactly, has this “original vision” been abandoned? By supporting a maximum block size?
- lawn 9y ago
  By making it clear that being able to use Bitcoin to pay for stuff isn't prioritized. And yes forcing a 1MB blocksize totally destroys Bitcoin being usable as digital cash. When average and median fees are $30 - $100 it simply doesn't make sense.
  - waytogo 9y ago
    > destroys Bitcoin being usable as digital cash. So what? I value the use as store of value much higher than a cash system and I don't care if this was the initial use case. Go and find a better store of value (won't be easy) but it's easy to find another cash system (FIAT-based ones likes CCs or new upcoming ones like Stellar).
    - lawn 9y ago
      > Go and find a better store of value Monero is far superior as it's fungible and private. Bitcoin Cash is also technically the same as Bitcoin while being cheaper to use and by virtue of being actually useful as cash has more uses which helps price growth and liquidity.