# bitcoin hype

#### elliptoid

##### eccentric
bitcoin is coming back to life again.

just curious what anybody has to say about it or has any advice.

All I can say is that people who trade btc with a focus on the fiat value are going to be the ones who miss out in the long run. It's ironic because right now we're seeing short term gains for bulls and bears since the incorporation of bitcoin, due to the volatility, but one thing is consistent: the holders will win the long haul. At least I think so.

This market-like trading for USD gains is going to be its own demise because I believe bitcoin is like a sleeping giant and all the little dollars are like a big massive army of little 1s trying to swarm it and influence it. It's short sighted to claim either victory or defeat based on any singular circumstance but most with a bird's eye view can tell the giant will do as it will and is under no influence from the swarm. Kind of a dumb metaphor maybe idk.

What I'm really trying to say is the value of bitcoin (cryptos in general) lie in its superior inception as a currency and that a failure to recognize as such is due to a stubborn anal retentiveness on behalf of the Federal Reserve debt machine.

This point of view is defensible on both fronts but admittedly it is difficult to shake the positive feeling of watching the fiat value of your crypto holdings increase or likewise the bitterness of watching it plummet. Nevertheless... holding a fixed amount of BTC and ignoring the variability of the $value is somewhat liberating and opens the individual to contemplate the true investment in the future of wealth and currency rather than simply wealth and currency extrapolated. #### Serac ##### Prolific Member You mentioned this somewhere else earlier – this thing about the supposed fallacy of denominating it in USD. I don't understand what you mean. It's just one out of many denominators. You can quote it in USD, GBP, the P/E of S&P500, or the current price of gummy bears. It's just a matter of transforming the BTC/USD rate to something else. USD is just a handy denominator because it's the largest international currency. Perhaps the gold spot price could be another good denominator, but in the end it doesn't really matter. I happen to have the opposite view btw – I think the long-term holders will lose everything and the short-term traders can (potentially) gain something. Because in the end, what you are holding is just a nothing that comes in artificially imposed limited supply. #### QuickTwist ##### Soothsayer You mentioned this somewhere else earlier – this thing about the supposed fallacy of denominating it in USD. I don't understand what you mean. It's just one out of many denominators. You can quote it in USD, GBP, the P/E of S&P500, or the current price of gummy bears. It's just a matter of transforming the BTC/USD rate to something else. USD is just a handy denominator because it's the largest international currency. Perhaps the gold spot price could be another good denominator, but in the end it doesn't really matter. I happen to have the opposite view btw – I think the long-term holders will lose everything and the short-term traders can (potentially) gain something. Because in the end, what you are holding is just a nothing that comes in artificially imposed limited supply. I thought you said in your own bitcoin thread that the people who hold on to their money with make a huge profit.. Was that not you or something? #### Animekitty ##### INFP Bitcoin is not hype because of the way the technology works. Because it is distributed and encrypted any transaction is permanent. So the only way to destabilize the blockchain is for the collective to stop using bitcoin. This would be as if everyone on earth stopped using dollars but on a smaller scale. One thing that makes bitcoin resilient is deflation. People can lend out fractional bitcoins. Deci bitcoins and milli bitcoins and this mean larger participation of the public. Greater velocity of money flow. A new technology for bitcoin has now even been developed where we no longer need a block or chain but instead a tree. This reduces the cryptology transition distribution from minutes to seconds as fast as credit cards. And Bitcoin is not stocks and bonds it is really stable money increasing in value, supported by the faith in the bitcoin just as faith in the dollar works and now it can work like a bank card near future. This is good and many many variants can happen because it is a technology on computers but relies on trust. (in bitcoin we trust) That is my take on it. It may have flaws. but tech issues have tech solutions. money as technology will evolve. #### Serac ##### Prolific Member I thought you said in your own bitcoin thread that the people who hold on to their money with make a huge profit.. Was that not you or something? Definitely not me #### elliptoid ##### eccentric You mentioned this somewhere else earlier – this thing about the supposed fallacy of denominating it in USD. I don't understand what you mean. It's just one out of many denominators. You can quote it in USD, GBP, the P/E of S&P500, or the current price of gummy bears. It's just a matter of transforming the BTC/USD rate to something else. USD is just a handy denominator because it's the largest international currency. Perhaps the gold spot price could be another good denominator, but in the end it doesn't really matter. I happen to have the opposite view btw – I think the long-term holders will lose everything and the short-term traders can (potentially) gain something. Because in the end, what you are holding is just a nothing that comes in artificially imposed limited supply. ok I'll say it again but slowly but I'm in no mood to be abraded without due cause. Point A. the supposed fallacy of denominating it in USD More like a ... under representation of its true value. It's no more fallacious to 'denominate' bitcoin in USD than it is to do the same with the Loonie. We don't walk around Canada asking people how many USD worth of CDN they have and even if that was the polite thing to do we'd still just ask in CDN because it's more meaningful. Valuation has a subjective component, and I think that$1 US in Ontario is valued moderately less than $1 US in New York due to the subjective aspect. Point B. It's just one out of many denominators. You can quote it in USD, GBP, the P/E of S&P500, or the current price of gummy bears. I think.. that maybe the "fallacy" is discovered in your next here sentence. I think .... that it ought not to be thought of as a 'numerator' per se but rather instead a whole, singular, independent entity: BTC. Absolute in its own right, and not reliant on 'denominators' to validate its existence. Your example is like converting m/s into ft/yr. into cm/day just for fun but ultimately all are equally meaningful, especially in different contexts.. but hell, the m and the s are just a little bit more meaningful than the others. That's what you're saying about the USD I think. It's just a little bit more meaningful than the others, because it's a SI Unit like the m and s. As an analogy... I think it works. Point C. in the end, what you are holding is just a nothing that comes in artificially imposed limited supply. Only a couple of things to say about this. First is: what's artificial about the imposition of bitcoin? That's an erroneous belief! Persistently maintaining erroneous beliefs, or PMEB for short, is never going to allow you to "try to see" the other side. what good is that? You are not holding nothing. You are holding private encryption keys that prove ownership and give unrestricted access to publicly identifiable and traceable assets. If you aren't holding your private keys then gtfo. just kidding about that. Bitcoin imposition (minting), as I know you well know, is rigorously described in the architecture of the machine. Last response to point C - a quick thought... but why is it intrinsically preferable to hold value in something that has an unlimited supply, such as the USD? This is an example of the 95% population paradox............ fuck I can't find the official name at the moment but I'll be damned if I don't soon....... Ah yes it is the DOOMSDAY ARGUMENT Serac, if I may comment personally... I'm a bit baffled that you're so skeptical and cynical, and quite frankly, seemingly deliberate. Bitcoin is not hype because of the way the technology works. Because it is distributed and encrypted any transaction is permanent. So the only way to destabilize the blockchain is for the collective to stop using bitcoin. This would be as if everyone on earth stopped using dollars but on a smaller scale. One thing that makes bitcoin resilient is deflation. People can lend out fractional bitcoins. Deci bitcoins and milli bitcoins and this mean larger participation of the public. Greater velocity of money flow. A new technology for bitcoin has now even been developed where we no longer need a block or chain but instead a tree. This reduces the cryptology transition distribution from minutes to seconds as fast as credit cards. And Bitcoin is not stocks and bonds it is really stable money increasing in value, supported by the faith in the bitcoin just as faith in the dollar works and now it can work like a bank card near future. This is good and many many variants can happen because it is a technology on computers but relies on trust. (in bitcoin we trust) That is my take on it. It may have flaws. but tech issues have tech solutions. money as technology will evolve. ow my eyes. I can't remember a whole lot about public key encryptography but one thing I think I remember is that if an algorithm is discovered to decrypt the private key then all security is lost. To me, it is not unfeasible that a superior AI with superior resources could somehow analyze the metadata of the block chain and discover such a process, whereupon it would be a trivial matter of reprocessing the whole block chain in reverse to prove it owns all assets. Science fiction probably. #### Serac ##### Prolific Member ok I'll say it again but slowly but I'm in no mood to be abraded without due cause. Point A. the supposed fallacy of denominating it in USD More like a ... under representation of its true value. It's no more fallacious to 'denominate' bitcoin in USD than it is to do the same with the Loonie. We don't walk around Canada asking people how many USD worth of CDN they have and even if that was the polite thing to do we'd still just ask in CDN because it's more meaningful. Valuation has a subjective component, and I think that$1 US in Ontario is valued moderately less than \$1 US in New York due to the subjective aspect.
Sorry dude but you seem to not understand what currency even is. The reason you are not talking about the CDN/USD rate in Canada is that on any given day, you can safely assume that the number of CDN you have to pay up for, say, a gallon of milk, is the same that day as it was the day before. If you live in e.g. Venezuela, in order to know how much "money" you have, you cannot just quote the number you're seeing on your account because the relative value of that currency changes dramatically over quite short time frames.

The point is that a currency doesn't have any value on its own. It's only valuable relative to how much stuff you can buy with it. There is no absolute measure of the value of any currency.

You are not holding nothing. You are holding private encryption keys that prove ownership and give unrestricted access to publicly identifiable and traceable assets. If you aren't holding your private keys then gtfo. just kidding about that.

Bitcoin imposition (minting), as I know you well know, is rigorously described in the architecture of the machine.
You have only described the technology surrounding the actual currency, not the value of the currency itself.
.. but why is it intrinsically preferable to hold value in something that has an unlimited supply, such as the USD?
USD doesn't come in unlimited supply as long as banks are required to keep a fractional reserve and don't lend money in unlimitied amounts. If it were in unlimited supply, the USD/gold rate would have converged to zero a long time ago.
Serac, if I may comment personally... I'm a bit baffled that you're so skeptical and cynical, and quite frankly, seemingly deliberate.
Sorry if I don't sugarcoat my opinions on this but as I work in finance, a lot of my effort goes into separating empty narratives from real arguments (and let me tell ya, there's a lot of the former).