That literally means nothing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521313)

if i wanted to transfer 1,000,000 USD worth of renminbi or euros from china or europe to america tomorrow, i'd be able to do it (for free or for a profit if i wanted to do a bit of work selling the btc in chunks for a premium), relatively quickly and without the markets really noticing. impossible with any smallcap coin. which means that all the BIG money is going to use bitcoin in the near future, which means the EVEN BIGGER money is also going to use bitcoin, and so on.

the security of cryptocurrencies is based on the size of the network. it would take the world's 15 largest supercomputers or something crazy at this point to get over 50% of the bitcoin global hash rate and take over the network. small-cap cryptos like namecoin and feathercoin have already been 50% attacked successfully. so people aren't going to put their money into the coin you just wholesale copied from bitcoin unless it actually has an amazing new feature. and if it does, then let it compete. may the best currency win. but there's absolutely no doubt that the currency with the biggest network behind it is orders of magnitude better than the others.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24522647)

Excellent point. That's the real reason why gold is valuable--because it's the only metal in existence that is pretty and can be used to make attractive jewelry. Not because humanity just sort of congregated around it at some point in our history, and it simply retained its relative popularity by continuing consensus.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521324)

This would be a damning analogy if there was a greater than 0% chance that the number of BTC could quadruple overnight at some point going forward.

The correct analogy here is "BAM! A copper mine, a silver mine, and three other types of mines (none of which are gold) are discovered tomorrow that collectively quadruple the world's supply of those metals overnight. what happens to the price of gold?"

The answer of course is absolutely nothing, unless and until the world collectively decides that it no longer thinks gold is pretty much the shiniest and prettiest metal.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521368)

"but that's beside the point"

Right, because that would be a retarded point to make, since claiming that gold's current market value derives in any meaningful way from its purely industrial applications would make you a fucking retard.

"that kind of intertia has some practical significance"

And my point is that as long as you believe that the internet is here to stay, that neckbeards are here to stay, and that oppressive/shitty governments are here to stay, I'm not sure why you wouldn't bank on cryptocurrencies being here to stay as a new form of storing value. And unless one cryptocurrency is significantly better than all of the rest, I'm not sure why you wouldn't just assume that whichever captures the most marketshare up front will remain the frontrunner going forward (at least in the medium term) simply by weight of that same general consensus principle.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521361)

Brother I guess my point is that I just don't see this phenomenon writ large as a "bubble." Some cyptocurrency--perhaps one not yet invented--will become a new digital form of gold going forward. There is certainly a lot of speculation going on right now and many of the competing cryptos currently in the race will eventually fade to zero, but I don't think that makes the underlying phenomenon of cryptos = valuable a "bubble," it just means that in the wake of an unprecedented shift in how value is stored people are creating an ancillary bubble by trying to guess where the chip will ultimately fall. And even having said that, I don't think this ancillary bubble is anywhere near popping at this point because money is really just starting to pour in from the emerging markets that will find this whole proposition most appealing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521389)

Perhaps we were just talking past each other like ghosts screaming Jewdood in the wind brother. Peace be with you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521419)

Just FYI, this is like dismissing the entire internet boom of the late 90s by pointing out that pets.com failed. Meanwhile, I would literally kill a homeless man with my bare hands for the chance to go back and grab a bunch of Google stock c. 2000.

But feel free to continue observing that "anoncoin" will probably end up at zero. You are correct, and QED it follows that investing in cryptos right now is foolish.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521584)

Shall we go back to all of the XOXO threads from 6 months ago where everyone agreed that yeah, Bitcoin would have been a great buy at $8, but at a whopping $50 "it's definitely done here"? Or perhaps we can pull up a chart of Google from 1999 and laugh at the idiots who overvalued it?

Have fun beating the shit out of your strawman. The fact is that at the end of the day, no one on earth has any real idea right now whether Bitcoin will be more like Yahoo or more like Google because the internet makes this a uniquely disruptive and unprecedented situation. We only have our working theories, and if you think it's the former than God Bless and by all means please continue to chuckle at the idiots getting wrapped up in the hype. Just make sure that you are fully at peace with your decision so you're not punching any walls and beating yourself up if Bitcoin ultimately reaches $50k and crypto proves that it has real legs in a year or two. I can assure you that most intelligent people who have thoughtfully invested in cryptos at this point have made peace with the possibility of losing their $1k/$5k/whatever.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521779)

(Guy who totally gets the larger point himself, and doesn't get hung up on pointing out that Google wasn't publicly traded until 2004, totally eviscerating the idiotic distinction I was trying to draw between Yahoo and Google)

PS: The last thing I'll say is that even if everything you claim about the probable 3-4x "overvaluation" of Google stock in 1999 (if it had been publicly traded then) is true, it would have still been a long-term steal to have purchased it at that its 3-4x "overvalued" price back then and I would make that grab all day, every day because I think that Google is here to stay and is going nowhere but up.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521807)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521334)

...except we're seeing individuals speculating in all of the bullshit altcoins, not (by and large) institutional investors, and certainly not vendors (none of whom directly accept anything other than bitcoin at this point, although I suspect that LTC will soon join BTC in that pantheon). Within a year it will become clear, if it's not already, who the medium-term winners are and the speculation regarding the also-rans will fade away. Acting like all of these coins are functionally fungible at this point is just stupid and shows that you know nothing about the state of the market.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521438)

I will be shocked if more than 2-3 ever gain serious market traction. And BTC will be one of them, at least at first.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521521)

Holy fuck brother you're right, you're just not thinking big enough--what about when the other one decides to create 21 TRILLION units of value?!?!?! Get out now while you can!

(Legit retard)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521552)

...except that once enough players are invested in the game, they don't want to see the system crash. And they can easily prevent that by simply coalescing (on the vendor/institutional investor fronts) around a few relatively well-designed, relatively secure coins that are coded to have a known finite supply. Sort of like BTC and LTC.

But you're right, if vendors just started throwing open the doors to every altcoin being created, or opened to the door to an altcoin coded with a limitless supply, the effect on the overall market could be devastating. Somehow I'm not too worried about that particular scenario because, you know, it's fucking idiotic.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521596)

THE CODE OF THE WINKELVII

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521331)

?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#34934528)

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=bitcoin%20value

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#27070673)

PS: Anyone who hasn't invested *at least* $1k in BTC and LTC at this point to hold is a fucking retard, straight up. Even if you think this is 100% a bubble (which also probably makes you a retard because there's definitely a >0% chance that these currencies will still be with us for at least the next decade in some internationally meaningful capacity), it's painfully obvious that this bubble is nowhere near the popping point just yet.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521311)

Because one approach is a reasonable and intelligent wager, and the other approach makes you CGM.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521351)

Where were you in 2011 when people were shitting on me about bitcoin then?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521750)

Brother I am not hating on you, I am making a point. You are a true believer, which often leads you to objectively absurd and extreme results. Sometimes those results are bad (being mocked on XO for your crazy beliefs about the normative autonomy of children), and sometimes those results are good (making $40k on your early bitcoin bid). I tend to think that on average, the former instances pop up much more frequently than the latter, which is why I'm not an ideologue.

My only point here is that I am much more of a principled pragmatist, with the latter being the key word. I try to hew a course much closer to the middle. That's why I'm not sitting on $40k right now and why I didn't give bitcoin a second thought two years ago--but it's also why I'm open to accepting that this was probably a mistake and making a leap into the market today.

And anyway you're $40k richer than I am on this front, so even if you take this comment as an insult (which you should not, it takes all kinds in this world and perhaps you are on the right course after all) you should just be laughing all the way to the bank at this point.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521906)

how big a bet do you have on bitcoin?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24550764)

180 brother.

Just make sure you make peace with the fact that you really could lose it all. This is that extremely rare lottery ticket that actually comes with good odds and a real potential for life changing upside, but it's still a lottery ticket. Play it for what it is and don't do something crazy like sinking your whole life savings into it. Be smart, place your bets, and then hold.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24522582)

http://i.imgur.com/TciFiTb.png

* * * NOWHERE NEAR * * *

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#27153078)

Agreed, that guy is an infamous retard I hope nobody here listened to him

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#43070944)

LJL

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521624)

For the same reason that we have a system of checks in place now designed to prevent a run on U.S. banks?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521713)

but i would argue that protections for banks is to prevent irrational behavior from fucking things up

while protections for bitcoins is to prevent rational behavior from fucking things up.

yes, this is a self-serving distinction, but 'backed by the usa government' versus 'backed by a guaranteed electronic scarcity algorhithm' makes the distinction apt, imo

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521743)

I'm not some CGM neckbeard true believer man, I'm just a guy who personally thinks that crypto (in some form) is here to stay and will get exponentially bigger than it currently is in the world marketplace. Could I be wrong? I doubt it but yeah I could be. Could we be approaching the top of a huge bubble? I doubt it but yeah I could be.

All I'm saying is that the "PONZI SCHEME!!!!" conspiracy theorists sound as loony to me as the "BITCOIN IS IMMUNE TO BUBBLE!!!!" ideologues. I think it's pretty clear that this falls somewhere in the middle. Whether crypto proves to be the next Google or he next Pets.com remains to be seen, but I think most people who are really involved in the crypto community are acting in good faith and really think they're selling something that will hold value in the long run.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521759)

Well played brother, we're all done here and cryptos will definitely amount to nothing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521602)

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=12156.0

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521627)

cia cornering the market on upperdeck griffey jr rookie cards

nancy pelosi trading bj's for tesla stock

you might be onto something

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2424641&forum_id=2#24521835)