3 ms·

Last year Alexis O’hanion predicted BTC would be 20k and ETH 1.5k by this time too. Many executives seem over enthusiastic about cryptocurrencies to me.

api 8y ago
Maybe they are bag holders. I am still long term somewhat bullish on the tech but I can't see any of the current generation working beyond niche use. Its not just efficiency but also economics. They are significantly more deflationary than gold, meaning there is never any incentive to do anything but speculate on them. If they gain any utility they will "moon" again and the resulting price instability will once again drive off everyone except speculators.
- avar 8y ago
  Whether it's deflationary or inflationary in the long term doesn't really matter for the purposes of whether it's useful as a short-term transaction medium for conversion into fiat on both ends, which is presumably the use-case for the Cash app.
- ucha 8y ago
  Bitcoin has plenty of issues but being deflationary isn't one of them. Real estate is deflationary and people do not refuse to trade land.
  - asynchrony 8y ago
    Real Estate has a certain real world utility.
  - api 8y ago
    Land would make extremely poor money.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - calciphus 8y ago
    Lots of people refuse to trade land because they think it will be worth more in the future. Look at the housing markets of major cities. And that is when you have a highly localized set of potential buyers.
runeks 8y ago
Predicting the success of a certain technology (the Lightning Network) and the price of something are two completely different things, though.
- asynchrony 8y ago
  You don’t think that these two things are correlated?
  - dmix 8y ago
    Many crypto communities have been trying very hard to disconnect the two (price from success) in the public’s conscious. Which has some legitimate arguments in it’s favour. My view, and I don’t have much of a horse in this race, is that price may be one contributing metric but it’s a weak one to use as the only metric. There’s tons of work involved in getting adoption for the tech happening in the background that is disconnected from the price. Especially considering how many people are speculating with it using vague public indicators (like media hype) without much direct connection to the value it’s producing. Not to mention the unpredictablity of it’s long term value of an entire tech is far harder to predict than it is a companies value via stock price.

api 8y ago

Maybe they are bag holders. I am still long term somewhat bullish on the tech but I can't see any of the current generation working beyond niche use. Its not just efficiency but also economics. They are significantly more deflationary than gold, meaning there is never any incentive to do anything but speculate on them. If they gain any utility they will "moon" again and the resulting price instability will once again drive off everyone except speculators.

avar 8y ago
Whether it's deflationary or inflationary in the long term doesn't really matter for the purposes of whether it's useful as a short-term transaction medium for conversion into fiat on both ends, which is presumably the use-case for the Cash app.
ucha 8y ago
Bitcoin has plenty of issues but being deflationary isn't one of them. Real estate is deflationary and people do not refuse to trade land.
- asynchrony 8y ago
  Real Estate has a certain real world utility.
- api 8y ago
  Land would make extremely poor money.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- calciphus 8y ago
  Lots of people refuse to trade land because they think it will be worth more in the future. Look at the housing markets of major cities. And that is when you have a highly localized set of potential buyers.

runeks 8y ago

Predicting the success of a certain technology (the Lightning Network) and the price of something are two completely different things, though.

asynchrony 8y ago
You don’t think that these two things are correlated?
- dmix 8y ago
  Many crypto communities have been trying very hard to disconnect the two (price from success) in the public’s conscious. Which has some legitimate arguments in it’s favour. My view, and I don’t have much of a horse in this race, is that price may be one contributing metric but it’s a weak one to use as the only metric. There’s tons of work involved in getting adoption for the tech happening in the background that is disconnected from the price. Especially considering how many people are speculating with it using vague public indicators (like media hype) without much direct connection to the value it’s producing. Not to mention the unpredictablity of it’s long term value of an entire tech is far harder to predict than it is a companies value via stock price.