"Bitcoins," Internet nerd libertarian monopoly money, crashes, no one surprised

[PSOL]

This thread rules because it could have plausibly been posted at around 6 or 7 distinct times in the past decade. In another 6-18 months, it will be bumped again and the title will apply again.

Yes, but the snark would have more impact if it didn't keep bouncing back from each crash astronomically bigger than before.

"Ha ha, Bitcoin just went from $2 to 25¢!"

"Ha ha, Bitcoin just went from $8 to $2!"

"Ha Ha, Bitcoin just went from $30 to $8!"

"Ha ha, Bitcoin just went from $50,000 to $40,000."

The next crash is going to be very brutal and a lot of people will commit suicide over it and/or be financially ruined, which was not true in 2011. Of course, for this reason, snark would be inappropriate - I do not enjoy seeing people suffer only because they are stupid and for no other reason - but this snake oil is still snake oil...

"Tonight on Boise's 6 o'clock news, a local self-admitted socialist on an internet forum expresses giddiness at the thought of his political enemies committing mass suicide in the near future."

[PSOL]

I suspect E-currency of all kinds is going to be more prominent in the future, but Bitcoin won’t be prominent in the future unless it updates its source code to work out the kinks that it has preventing it from being commercially viable.

[PSOL]

I suspect E-currency of all kinds is going to be more prominent in the future, but Bitcoin won’t be prominent in the future unless it updates its source code to work out the kinks that it has preventing it from being commercially viable.

Bitcoin is not, never has been, and never can be a currency.  It's model prevents it from ever handling the volume of transactions necessary to function as a currency.

Cryptocurrencies are commodities (currently) but there’s been some talk and initial development of actual e-currencies lately.

Yes the limiting factor of Bitcoin in particular of having a set limit of units in circulation is one aspect hindering its growth, but if the source code is updated that could change, as unlikely as it is. With other cryptocurrencies though it could be possible, especially if a group finds a way to not yield most of its value in being so closely tied or needing to be exchanged with a current recognized currency, or a cryptocurrency or e-currency being said recognized currency.

[PSOL]

I suspect E-currency of all kinds is going to be more prominent in the future, but Bitcoin won’t be prominent in the future unless it updates its source code to work out the kinks that it has preventing it from being commercially viable.

Bitcoin is not, never has been, and never can be a currency.  It's model prevents it from ever handling the volume of transactions necessary to function as a currency.

Cryptocurrencies are commodities (currently) but there’s been some talk and initial development of actual e-currencies lately.

Yes the limiting factor of Bitcoin in particular of having a set limit of units in circulation is one aspect hindering its growth, but if the source code is updated that could change, as unlikely as it is. With other cryptocurrencies though it could be possible, especially if a group finds a way to not yield most of its value in being so closely tied or needing to be exchanged with a current recognized currency, or a cryptocurrency or e-currency being said recognized currency.

Considering that fractional Bitcoins can be traded, the limit on the number of Bitcoins isn't a problem. Bitcoin's problem is that it cannot handle a high enuf transaction rate to be a currency.

Well yea, that’s why one option is to update the source code.

If not Bitcoin, it will be another cryptocurrency or a nationally recognized e-currency

[PSOL]

So the prices are rising again due to Musk working on providing less energy-intensive transactions. Why this was not done or thought about previously, and why he made a quick and careless decision in the first place wiping off millions of speculation is a testament to his poor management style.

[PSOL]

So the prices are rising again due to Musk working on providing less energy-intensive transactions. Why this was not done or thought about previously, and why he made a quick and careless decision in the first place wiping off millions of speculation is a testament to his poor management style.

Functioning blockchains using proof of stake rather than proof of work date back all the way to 2012; none of this is new information.

I was referring to Musk approving Bitcoin transactions then abruptly cancelling them.