9 ms·

Bitcoin is back: Price quietly jumps 80%

89 points by mathattack 12y ago

luxpir 12y ago
Noticed this jump over the last few days, randomly checking the price with DDG. It's never clear what's behind these things, but I'm sure there will be some explanation (when the jump has reversed, no doubt).
- selectodude 12y ago
  The daily volume has tripled in the past 15 days. There must be something behind that.
  - mathattack 12y ago
    There are two competing theories... 1 - When there's not a lot of volume, you can't trust price movements because it doesn't represent a critical mass of opinions. 2 - When there's too much volume, you can't trust price movements because it's a mania or panic. I'm not sure if #2 is true in this case. It'll be interesting to watch.
    - selectodude 12y ago
      Bitcoin is fascinating. I have zero dollars in it for a reason, though.
      - justizin 12y ago
        exactly how I feel about the stock market.
        mathattack 12y ago
        I feel safer buying stock market indices than I do Bitcoin though. It just feels too much driven by insiders. (Also why I don't trade Gold or Oil)
  - tomasz207 12y ago
    DirectTV started accepting BTC as a form of payment recently. Not sure if that could be driving up the volume?
    - cauterize 12y ago
      It was Dish not DirectTV.
  - williamcotton 12y ago
    My company launched a Facebook Bitcoin wallet two weeks ago and we've been seeing a lot of organic viral growth. We've had a few people in the Bitcoin community say that they're sure that it must be our app and the press related to such consumer friendly Bitcoin applications. Who knows, maybe it was us at QuickCoin? :D https://wallet.quickcoin.co https://wallet.quickcoin.co
  - skaevola 12y ago
    Could be related to Apple's announcement regarding cryptocurrencies in apps.
    - justizin 12y ago
      that wasn't 15 days ago.
      - williamcotton 12y ago
        You know what WAS 15 days ago? Our launch. I can't share transaction volumes or any other metrics right now, but I will say they have been substantial and are growing naturally and introducing a brand new group of people to Bitcoin. I'm getting downvoted with a previous comment because it probably looks like spam but you can find me online if you want more details on who we are and what we make.
- kingmanaz 12y ago
  See here: http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/279jad/daily_discussion_wednesday_june_04_2014/chytxb6 http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/279jad/daily... The "Bubble Watch" graphs have been updated daily for several months in anticipation of a future bubble. Bitcoin's market price has spiked seven times since its inception, every 220 days on average, and the above graphs overlay the previous bubbles with the current performance to predict when a bubble might occur. Such charts may be a self fulfilling prophecy, though it's interesting to see how well the past bubbles align with the current spike. To get another view of the past bubbles, go to bitcoinwisdom.com, set "Settings -> Scale -> Logarithmic", and change the view to 3d.
ISL 12y ago
Some people have been expecting a ~May-June rise for months [1]. If you look at a log plot, and believe that the future has something to do with the past, this conclusion has some legs. News articles like this will tend to drive the hype again, repeating the cycle, perhaps with smaller amplitude. If enough people believe it to be true, it will happen, at least temporarily. [1] http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/bitcoin-price-2014/2013/12/30 http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/bitcoin-price-2014/2013/...
- mathattack 12y ago
  This is interesting because: 1 - Many efficient market theorists say there is no information is past price movement. 2 - There's a well known January effect in the stock market that's acknowledged by those who believe in #1. I look forward to following this. And yes - log plots are the best way to look for these patterns.
  - panarky 12y ago
    The efficient markets hypothesis has a hard time explaining behavior in real markets. In theory, traders search for asset prices that are higher or lower than fair value and profit by arbitraging back to fair value. But in real markets, rising prices encourage more buying, which drives prices even further from fair value. Falling prices encourage more selling, pushing prices lower still. Markets don't price to what traders think is fair value. They price to what traders think other traders will think the price will be.[1] We have reached the third degree where we devote our intelligences to anticipating what average opinion expects the average opinion to be. The very existence of persistent booms and busts debunks much of efficient markets theory, and consequently the illusion that free markets can regulate themselves. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - notahacker 12y ago
NelsonMinar 12y ago
Perhaps one of the other major exchanges started supporting a massive fraud? c.f. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7796748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7796748
rdmcfee 12y ago
This could just be a correlation but the BTC/USD price seems to be inversely correlated with MtGox news. Trending down when rehabilitation/takeover looks promising, trending up when Willy report comes out and the momentum of the takeover bids seems to stall.
joeyspn 12y ago
Bitcoin is also driven by market sentiment, and the current sentiment is quite positive after the much needed Gox purge and the latest news (DISH, UK Gov support, etc) Btc has recovered before from serious crashes and I'm pretty sure next Christmas could smash the current ATH... It really feels like last September/October or March '13. I wonder what the financial gurus with bitcoin-is-going-to-10-predictions [0] say about that if finally their predictions fail... [0] http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-2013-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-...
gst 12y ago
It will be interesting to see how this will work out in the long-term. Currently the cost of Bitcoin transaction is already at around $50 which makes Bitcoin transactions quite expensive. The only reason why this cost doesn't matter yet is because the inflationary factors (new coins, etc.) are smaller than the deflationary factors (more adoption, etc.). I see Bitcoin as something like the 2nd-gen P2P file sharing systems (Gnutella, etc.) where a radical decentralization approach was taken to counter weaknesses of the earlier generation (P2P: Napster, Currency: E-Gold). In the P2P world we figured out that a small amount of centralization provides benefits and is acceptable (e.g., Bittorrent). I suspect that in the e-currency world we'll be going a similar route, where successors to Bitcoin will use Ripple-like concensus systems instead of proof-of-work [2]. This should not only allow to significantly reduce the cost per transaction, but might also allow to make the network more secure in practice (as the number of validators in a concensus approach will be much larger than the number of mining pools with signficant hashing power in the Bitcoin world). [1] that's basically the cost of finding a new block divided by the number of transactions per block - see https://blockchain.info/en/charts/cost-per-transaction https://blockchain.info/en/charts/cost-per-transaction. [2] Proof-of-stake is a nice theoretical approach but due to the complexity involved it will probably take some time until a solution is found that also works well in practice. Proof-of-stake as implemented in Peercoin is basically outdated, something like Slasher (http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/01/15/slasher-a-punitive-proof-of-stake-algorithm/ http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/01/15/slasher-a-punitive-proof...) looks more like a viable solution. EDIT: As there has been some confusion about the $50 transactions costs: I'm not talking about direct costs for the person who initiated the transaction, but about externalized costs that are paid by the whole network. See my responses below.
- ok_craig 12y ago
  The cost of a bitcoin transaction is not $50, it's about $0.06. Often times, such as for large transactions or moving old coins, you don't need to include a fee at all.
  - gst 12y ago
    The direct cost per transaction (= the mining fees paid by the person who initiated the transaction) is $0.06. The externalized cost per transaction (= the block reward divided by the number of transactions) is $50.
solomania9 12y ago
http://bitcoinmegaphone.com/14XMmrqXiUcpPHySzj4SXSPyxLPiVVgoiX/ http://bitcoinmegaphone.com/14XMmrqXiUcpPHySzj4SXSPyxLPiVVgo...
- dangero 12y ago
  I'm assuming you made bitcoinmegaphone.com? This was very confusing for me and it took me about 5 minutes reading the site before I could understand what I was looking at. There's so much information on that page that is irrelevant to a person following that link. Perhaps I could see this being valuable if people used it like pastebin, but why do people have to pay so much to post something?
nlh 12y ago
I have to say, after the big piece appeared about price manipulation / fraud / whatever on MtGox, I have zero confidence that this is a genuine rise. Caveat: I'm not an "active Bitcoiner", just a casual observer. And I can tell you that my view is now irreparably tainted. The "normals" I interact with continue to not use Bitcoin for anything. It's even stopped coming up in casual conversation (likely because the tide of consumer news stories has slowed). From my perspective, the Bitcoin economy continues to be powered by people who have either mined or bought BTC and are just exploring new ways to spend their windfall (Overstock! 50 Cent's new Album! Dish Networks!) There is still no incentive to get paid in BTC, no incentive to use BTC, and no incentive to hold BTC (as the recent spike shows, it's still incredibly volatile). For now, I'm holding on my belief that the Blockchain is the real story here -- and we haven't yet discovered the killer app (which I _don't_ think is BTC).
- jhart3333 12y ago
  >> There is still no incentive to get paid in BTC How about no chargebacks? That seems to be a pretty big issue for anyone doing business on the internet.
  - valarauca1 12y ago
    Collectively we (as a generation, let alone a culture) haven't reached a point where more shopping is done online then in person. Until we start to approach that point we don't start to a bigger push for online digital currencies form the general population.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      And even then "online digital currencies" aren't really particularly needed where there are satisfactory online digital payment mechanisms denominated in traditional currencies.
  - sequoia 12y ago
    Chargebacks, while inconvenient for vendors, provide utility to consumers, especially online when there can be a long delay between paying and getting to receive/examine the product.
rgbrgb 12y ago
I'm pretty excited that Apple seems to be loosening their terms around cryptocurrency apps. Maybe that helps explain the spike? I'm hoping for some neat p2p ios apps.
unclebucknasty 12y ago
I have zero evidence to support this except, perhaps, Occam's Razor and Bitcoin history, but I believe this to be either fraud or manipulation. In fact, I believe the majority of Bitcoin's price, whether volatility or stability, is not the product of natural market forces. How does an asset with virtually no underlying value remain so remarkably stable for long periods? Then, how does that same asset suddenly experience such sharp increases in value and volatility? There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. They can easily manipulate the market towards stability. And, as we saw with Mt Gox, unsecured and unregulated exchanges can also be a vehicle for market manipulation and outright fraud. I know that opinion is unpopular with some, especially without hard evidence, but many also believed the increase before the Mt Gox fiasco was organic. I am not a Bitcoin hater, and have dabbled myself for a decent return. I just think its past time to secure it properly and earnestly acknowledge its vulnerabilities. That vs. pretending that any of this makes sense from a traditional market perspective.
- icebraining 12y ago
  How does an asset with virtually no underlying value remain so remarkably stable for long periods? (...) There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. Long periods? Long-term? When has ever Bitcoin experienced this? Looking at the graphs, I don't think I can find a single month where Bitcoin remains even close to stable.
  - unclebucknasty 12y ago
    >Looking at the graphs, I don't think I can find a single month where Bitcoin remains even close to stable. Sure you can. And, even more so when you define stability relative to the degree of fluctuation during volatile periods.
- justizin 12y ago
  "There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. They can easily manipulate the market towards stability." Why is this suspicious?
Havoc 12y ago
So who is fudging things this time round?
laichzeit0 12y ago
For those who have been using Bitcoin for years now it's completely fascinating that people still doubt a technology like this that's seen _so many_ ups and downs and yet it just refuses to die. It stubbornly refuses to fail despite everyone's best wishes that it inevitably should.
- sanswork 12y ago
  It is possible it refuses to fail because a lot of people are heavily invested in it financially and monetarily and are still able to artificially prop it up. Support like that cannot last for ever.
- vibragiel 12y ago
  See, continuous ups and downs may be seen as kind of a failure.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  The 419 scam has been running for over a century, but that doesn't make it a good model for wealth redistribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/419_scams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/419_scams
  - laichzeit0 12y ago
    I don't think it's meant as a model of wealth redistribution. I personally just like the fact that Bitcoin allows me to pay for things in a one-time sort of way. For example, paying for pornography would be brilliant. I don't want something as edgy as that linked to my physical address or credit card in any way.
- rsynnott 12y ago
  > it's completely fascinating that people still doubt a technology like this that's seen _so many_ ups and downs and yet it just refuses to die Sounds rather like Second Life. Linden dollars, the currency of the future!
lnanek2 12y ago
Kind of weird talking about some conference in Europe no one ever heard of when Apple just OK'ed virtual currencies...

89 points by mathattack 12y ago

Noticed this jump over the last few days, randomly checking the price with DDG. It's never clear what's behind these things, but I'm sure there will be some explanation (when the jump has reversed, no doubt).

selectodude 12y ago
The daily volume has tripled in the past 15 days. There must be something behind that.
- mathattack 12y ago
  There are two competing theories... 1 - When there's not a lot of volume, you can't trust price movements because it doesn't represent a critical mass of opinions. 2 - When there's too much volume, you can't trust price movements because it's a mania or panic. I'm not sure if #2 is true in this case. It'll be interesting to watch.
  - selectodude 12y ago
    Bitcoin is fascinating. I have zero dollars in it for a reason, though.
    - justizin 12y ago
      exactly how I feel about the stock market.
      - mathattack 12y ago
        I feel safer buying stock market indices than I do Bitcoin though. It just feels too much driven by insiders. (Also why I don't trade Gold or Oil)
- tomasz207 12y ago
  DirectTV started accepting BTC as a form of payment recently. Not sure if that could be driving up the volume?
  - cauterize 12y ago
    It was Dish not DirectTV.
- williamcotton 12y ago
  My company launched a Facebook Bitcoin wallet two weeks ago and we've been seeing a lot of organic viral growth. We've had a few people in the Bitcoin community say that they're sure that it must be our app and the press related to such consumer friendly Bitcoin applications. Who knows, maybe it was us at QuickCoin? :D https://wallet.quickcoin.co https://wallet.quickcoin.co
- skaevola 12y ago
  Could be related to Apple's announcement regarding cryptocurrencies in apps.
  - justizin 12y ago
    that wasn't 15 days ago.
    - williamcotton 12y ago
      You know what WAS 15 days ago? Our launch. I can't share transaction volumes or any other metrics right now, but I will say they have been substantial and are growing naturally and introducing a brand new group of people to Bitcoin. I'm getting downvoted with a previous comment because it probably looks like spam but you can find me online if you want more details on who we are and what we make.
kingmanaz 12y ago
See here: http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/279jad/daily_discussion_wednesday_june_04_2014/chytxb6 http://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets/comments/279jad/daily... The "Bubble Watch" graphs have been updated daily for several months in anticipation of a future bubble. Bitcoin's market price has spiked seven times since its inception, every 220 days on average, and the above graphs overlay the previous bubbles with the current performance to predict when a bubble might occur. Such charts may be a self fulfilling prophecy, though it's interesting to see how well the past bubbles align with the current spike. To get another view of the past bubbles, go to bitcoinwisdom.com, set "Settings -> Scale -> Logarithmic", and change the view to 3d.

ISL 12y ago

Some people have been expecting a ~May-June rise for months [1]. If you look at a log plot, and believe that the future has something to do with the past, this conclusion has some legs. News articles like this will tend to drive the hype again, repeating the cycle, perhaps with smaller amplitude. If enough people believe it to be true, it will happen, at least temporarily. [1] http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/bitcoin-price-2014/2013/12/30 http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/bitcoin-price-2014/2013/...

mathattack 12y ago
This is interesting because: 1 - Many efficient market theorists say there is no information is past price movement. 2 - There's a well known January effect in the stock market that's acknowledged by those who believe in #1. I look forward to following this. And yes - log plots are the best way to look for these patterns.
- panarky 12y ago
  The efficient markets hypothesis has a hard time explaining behavior in real markets. In theory, traders search for asset prices that are higher or lower than fair value and profit by arbitraging back to fair value. But in real markets, rising prices encourage more buying, which drives prices even further from fair value. Falling prices encourage more selling, pushing prices lower still. Markets don't price to what traders think is fair value. They price to what traders think other traders will think the price will be.[1] We have reached the third degree where we devote our intelligences to anticipating what average opinion expects the average opinion to be. The very existence of persistent booms and busts debunks much of efficient markets theory, and consequently the illusion that free markets can regulate themselves. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_beauty_contest
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - notahacker 12y ago

NelsonMinar 12y ago

Perhaps one of the other major exchanges started supporting a massive fraud? c.f. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7796748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7796748

rdmcfee 12y ago

This could just be a correlation but the BTC/USD price seems to be inversely correlated with MtGox news. Trending down when rehabilitation/takeover looks promising, trending up when Willy report comes out and the momentum of the takeover bids seems to stall.

joeyspn 12y ago

Bitcoin is also driven by market sentiment, and the current sentiment is quite positive after the much needed Gox purge and the latest news (DISH, UK Gov support, etc) Btc has recovered before from serious crashes and I'm pretty sure next Christmas could smash the current ATH... It really feels like last September/October or March '13. I wonder what the financial gurus with bitcoin-is-going-to-10-predictions [0] say about that if finally their predictions fail... [0] http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-2013-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-...

gst 12y ago

It will be interesting to see how this will work out in the long-term. Currently the cost of Bitcoin transaction is already at around $50 which makes Bitcoin transactions quite expensive. The only reason why this cost doesn't matter yet is because the inflationary factors (new coins, etc.) are smaller than the deflationary factors (more adoption, etc.). I see Bitcoin as something like the 2nd-gen P2P file sharing systems (Gnutella, etc.) where a radical decentralization approach was taken to counter weaknesses of the earlier generation (P2P: Napster, Currency: E-Gold). In the P2P world we figured out that a small amount of centralization provides benefits and is acceptable (e.g., Bittorrent). I suspect that in the e-currency world we'll be going a similar route, where successors to Bitcoin will use Ripple-like concensus systems instead of proof-of-work [2]. This should not only allow to significantly reduce the cost per transaction, but might also allow to make the network more secure in practice (as the number of validators in a concensus approach will be much larger than the number of mining pools with signficant hashing power in the Bitcoin world). [1] that's basically the cost of finding a new block divided by the number of transactions per block - see https://blockchain.info/en/charts/cost-per-transaction https://blockchain.info/en/charts/cost-per-transaction. [2] Proof-of-stake is a nice theoretical approach but due to the complexity involved it will probably take some time until a solution is found that also works well in practice. Proof-of-stake as implemented in Peercoin is basically outdated, something like Slasher (http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/01/15/slasher-a-punitive-proof-of-stake-algorithm/ http://blog.ethereum.org/2014/01/15/slasher-a-punitive-proof...) looks more like a viable solution. EDIT: As there has been some confusion about the $50 transactions costs: I'm not talking about direct costs for the person who initiated the transaction, but about externalized costs that are paid by the whole network. See my responses below.

ok_craig 12y ago
The cost of a bitcoin transaction is not $50, it's about $0.06. Often times, such as for large transactions or moving old coins, you don't need to include a fee at all.
- gst 12y ago
  The direct cost per transaction (= the mining fees paid by the person who initiated the transaction) is $0.06. The externalized cost per transaction (= the block reward divided by the number of transactions) is $50.

solomania9 12y ago

http://bitcoinmegaphone.com/14XMmrqXiUcpPHySzj4SXSPyxLPiVVgoiX/ http://bitcoinmegaphone.com/14XMmrqXiUcpPHySzj4SXSPyxLPiVVgo...

dangero 12y ago
I'm assuming you made bitcoinmegaphone.com? This was very confusing for me and it took me about 5 minutes reading the site before I could understand what I was looking at. There's so much information on that page that is irrelevant to a person following that link. Perhaps I could see this being valuable if people used it like pastebin, but why do people have to pay so much to post something?

nlh 12y ago

I have to say, after the big piece appeared about price manipulation / fraud / whatever on MtGox, I have zero confidence that this is a genuine rise. Caveat: I'm not an "active Bitcoiner", just a casual observer. And I can tell you that my view is now irreparably tainted. The "normals" I interact with continue to not use Bitcoin for anything. It's even stopped coming up in casual conversation (likely because the tide of consumer news stories has slowed). From my perspective, the Bitcoin economy continues to be powered by people who have either mined or bought BTC and are just exploring new ways to spend their windfall (Overstock! 50 Cent's new Album! Dish Networks!) There is still no incentive to get paid in BTC, no incentive to use BTC, and no incentive to hold BTC (as the recent spike shows, it's still incredibly volatile). For now, I'm holding on my belief that the Blockchain is the real story here -- and we haven't yet discovered the killer app (which I _don't_ think is BTC).

jhart3333 12y ago
>> There is still no incentive to get paid in BTC How about no chargebacks? That seems to be a pretty big issue for anyone doing business on the internet.
- valarauca1 12y ago
  Collectively we (as a generation, let alone a culture) haven't reached a point where more shopping is done online then in person. Until we start to approach that point we don't start to a bigger push for online digital currencies form the general population.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    And even then "online digital currencies" aren't really particularly needed where there are satisfactory online digital payment mechanisms denominated in traditional currencies.
- sequoia 12y ago
  Chargebacks, while inconvenient for vendors, provide utility to consumers, especially online when there can be a long delay between paying and getting to receive/examine the product.

rgbrgb 12y ago

I'm pretty excited that Apple seems to be loosening their terms around cryptocurrency apps. Maybe that helps explain the spike? I'm hoping for some neat p2p ios apps.

unclebucknasty 12y ago

I have zero evidence to support this except, perhaps, Occam's Razor and Bitcoin history, but I believe this to be either fraud or manipulation. In fact, I believe the majority of Bitcoin's price, whether volatility or stability, is not the product of natural market forces. How does an asset with virtually no underlying value remain so remarkably stable for long periods? Then, how does that same asset suddenly experience such sharp increases in value and volatility? There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. They can easily manipulate the market towards stability. And, as we saw with Mt Gox, unsecured and unregulated exchanges can also be a vehicle for market manipulation and outright fraud. I know that opinion is unpopular with some, especially without hard evidence, but many also believed the increase before the Mt Gox fiasco was organic. I am not a Bitcoin hater, and have dabbled myself for a decent return. I just think its past time to secure it properly and earnestly acknowledge its vulnerabilities. That vs. pretending that any of this makes sense from a traditional market perspective.

icebraining 12y ago
How does an asset with virtually no underlying value remain so remarkably stable for long periods? (...) There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. Long periods? Long-term? When has ever Bitcoin experienced this? Looking at the graphs, I don't think I can find a single month where Bitcoin remains even close to stable.
- unclebucknasty 12y ago
  >Looking at the graphs, I don't think I can find a single month where Bitcoin remains even close to stable. Sure you can. And, even more so when you define stability relative to the degree of fluctuation during volatile periods.
justizin 12y ago
"There are those with huge holdings who have an interest in stability for the sake of its adoption as a currency, and its long-term value. They can easily manipulate the market towards stability." Why is this suspicious?

Havoc 12y ago

So who is fudging things this time round?

laichzeit0 12y ago

For those who have been using Bitcoin for years now it's completely fascinating that people still doubt a technology like this that's seen _so many_ ups and downs and yet it just refuses to die. It stubbornly refuses to fail despite everyone's best wishes that it inevitably should.

sanswork 12y ago
It is possible it refuses to fail because a lot of people are heavily invested in it financially and monetarily and are still able to artificially prop it up. Support like that cannot last for ever.
vibragiel 12y ago
See, continuous ups and downs may be seen as kind of a failure.
anigbrowl 12y ago
The 419 scam has been running for over a century, but that doesn't make it a good model for wealth redistribution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/419_scams http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/419_scams
- laichzeit0 12y ago
  I don't think it's meant as a model of wealth redistribution. I personally just like the fact that Bitcoin allows me to pay for things in a one-time sort of way. For example, paying for pornography would be brilliant. I don't want something as edgy as that linked to my physical address or credit card in any way.
rsynnott 12y ago
> it's completely fascinating that people still doubt a technology like this that's seen _so many_ ups and downs and yet it just refuses to die Sounds rather like Second Life. Linden dollars, the currency of the future!

lnanek2 12y ago

Kind of weird talking about some conference in Europe no one ever heard of when Apple just OK'ed virtual currencies...