Coinbase raises $100M Series D led by IVP(blog.coinbase.com)
blog.coinbase.com
Coinbase raises $100M Series D led by IVP
https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-raises-100m-series-d-led-by-ivp-f5f25cb51019
241 comments
Bitcoin purists will say that, eventually, there is no "cash out" phase. 1 BTC = 1 BTC and who cares about what the dollar equivalent happens to be. Once everything is in BTC you will never exchange it for dollars.
Do you spend dollars today wondering if tomorrow the Euro will be worth more or less? No, so why would you care what the dollar equivalent to a BTC is when everything you buy is priced in BTC?
This is long term obviously. The reason the price is "high" now is because there is a finite amount. ~21 million BTC is the max that can ever exist at once. So, theoretically if you replaced the world's currencies with BTC, having a single BTC would make you incredibly wealthy.
Do you spend dollars today wondering if tomorrow the Euro will be worth more or less? No, so why would you care what the dollar equivalent to a BTC is when everything you buy is priced in BTC?
This is long term obviously. The reason the price is "high" now is because there is a finite amount. ~21 million BTC is the max that can ever exist at once. So, theoretically if you replaced the world's currencies with BTC, having a single BTC would make you incredibly wealthy.
I'm sure there are some "bitcoin purists" who think someday bitcoin will be used to buy everything, but that's certainly a minority viewpoint.
There's a more pragmatic way to think about it.
Bitcoin can coexist just fine with national currencies, and with other cryptocurrencies, and with precious metals. Bitcoin doesn't need to "win" by replacing any of these.
Bitcoin is valuable because it's a secure way to store and transfer value between people.
If bitcoin is never used to buy your morning coffee, that's OK. If only 1% of the population finds bitcoin useful, that's OK, too.
Dollars, euros and yen are better than bitcoin in many use cases, and bitcoin can do things that dollars, euros and yen cannot do in other use cases.
The simple fact is that many people find bitcoin useful, and that's what makes it valuable.
There's a more pragmatic way to think about it.
Bitcoin can coexist just fine with national currencies, and with other cryptocurrencies, and with precious metals. Bitcoin doesn't need to "win" by replacing any of these.
Bitcoin is valuable because it's a secure way to store and transfer value between people.
If bitcoin is never used to buy your morning coffee, that's OK. If only 1% of the population finds bitcoin useful, that's OK, too.
Dollars, euros and yen are better than bitcoin in many use cases, and bitcoin can do things that dollars, euros and yen cannot do in other use cases.
The simple fact is that many people find bitcoin useful, and that's what makes it valuable.
Yeah, I think there's a strange amount of both fans and people who dislike bitcoin that think bitcoin can only be valuable if it's on a path to complete adoption, replacing other currencies.
I see it more like a decentralized PayPal alternative, and I keep seeing it pop up in more places that I buy stuff online and I've made personal transactions with it to other people, so it's providing value to me and seems to be on a reasonably successful path.
I see it more like a decentralized PayPal alternative, and I keep seeing it pop up in more places that I buy stuff online and I've made personal transactions with it to other people, so it's providing value to me and seems to be on a reasonably successful path.
I know miners will hate me for saying this it will bring up the lightning network but I think the transaction costs are too high. They have to come down (close to zero if not zero) even if it means miners and node operators are working for no gain. I don't understand why it means that Bitcoin is insecure for people to be able to mine in their gpu.
Maybe we need to leave Bitcoin alone and come up with another currency for low value transactions that happen frequently? I'm thinking like buying coffee or groceries.
Maybe we need to leave Bitcoin alone and come up with another currency for low value transactions that happen frequently? I'm thinking like buying coffee or groceries.
It doesn't need to be another currency. You could have a lower security blockchain tethered to the main one, with higher capacity and lower fees but still carrying Bitcoin transactions. In general those are called sidechains, and there is a particular proposal right now called drivechain that might be worth a second look.
There are several other ways of transacting in Bitcoin outside the main replicated-everywhere-forever blockchain, Lightning perhaps being the most well known (with the defining feature of instant transactions).
Most of these systems are hard to implement without unmalleable txids, so interest will likely pick up now that we have segwit on the main chain. Those systems never left the idea stage while transactions were free but there's significantly more interest now. There are lots of interesting developments going on.
There are several other ways of transacting in Bitcoin outside the main replicated-everywhere-forever blockchain, Lightning perhaps being the most well known (with the defining feature of instant transactions).
Most of these systems are hard to implement without unmalleable txids, so interest will likely pick up now that we have segwit on the main chain. Those systems never left the idea stage while transactions were free but there's significantly more interest now. There are lots of interesting developments going on.
>I don't understand why it means that Bitcoin is insecure for people to be able to mine in their gpu.
What do you mean? People can mine with a gpu, but they won't make much because of the many miners using much faster ASICs. If you think Bitcoin should have been made so that ASICs weren't possible: a number of altcoins agree with that idea, but there's an argument to be made that optimized hardware is always possible, and by making it hard to make, it makes it more likely that a single small group who manages to make optimized hardware will be the only one to do so for a large time period, will be able to make huge amounts of profits funding more hardware, and at that point will easily be able to get up to >50% of the network hash rate (which breaks Bitcoin's decentralization and allows rewriting the blockchain). By using a proof-of-work that's relatively straight-forward to optimize means that when the possible mining rewards eventually incentivize development of ASICs, it's likely that multiple groups will be able to build them.
What do you mean? People can mine with a gpu, but they won't make much because of the many miners using much faster ASICs. If you think Bitcoin should have been made so that ASICs weren't possible: a number of altcoins agree with that idea, but there's an argument to be made that optimized hardware is always possible, and by making it hard to make, it makes it more likely that a single small group who manages to make optimized hardware will be the only one to do so for a large time period, will be able to make huge amounts of profits funding more hardware, and at that point will easily be able to get up to >50% of the network hash rate (which breaks Bitcoin's decentralization and allows rewriting the blockchain). By using a proof-of-work that's relatively straight-forward to optimize means that when the possible mining rewards eventually incentivize development of ASICs, it's likely that multiple groups will be able to build them.
Yes, but this way you're trading an elite made of hardware specialists and people that can afford to hire hardware specialists, with an elite made of people that can afford to fill datacenters with the most specialized hardware. Mining quickly becomes a game of "who can throw the most money into the problem" and ends up skewing the pool significantly because you are rewarded with money for winning the game, which means you can afford even more of the specialized hardware. That's the big thing with Bitcoin: All the miners are rich folks (these days, mostly Chinese) with huge datacenters and tons of cheap electricity. I have 12 of the USB ASIC miners that are many times unable to even pay for themselves in electricity costs because the difficulty is so high, which is the problem that squeezes out grandma's GPU miner and pushes even more people out of the mining game (not to even mention the ballooning size of the blockchain).
Sort of. There is a potential that if you take over the network that it all becomes worth nothing because users understand the trust problem and cash out in the lead up. Or the users elect to not use your currency, it could still hold value, as the blockchain until that point is valid, but it remains paused until the 51% is resolved. This encourages you to work covertly to organize the 51% stake and you have to hold it in secret or all your coin/power may become worthless. It's essentially the cold war and in the same way, it's in everyone's best interest to avoid destroying the value of the coin by being selfish in an attempt for differential advantage.
Sure, and to this point, there have been at least a handful of times when the 51% attack could have happened, as well-known, related mining pools could have combined their power to achieve the majority. It has been plausible before, and I'd imagine what you mention is the reason it still hasn't happened. It would destroy the coin, because who knows what happened while they had majority. There would probably be some kind of fork, and I'm sure the value would diminish. It would be messy for everybody.
The real value is in the underlying technology of the platform, the blockchain. Instant, secure transfers of value to anyone in the world at minimal cost with a publicly auditable ledger. There are also many cool things that can be built on top of the tech, including secure online voting: https://followmyvote.com/online-voting-technology/blockchain...
Instant as "as soon as miners picked it up and added a few chain segments". And so far no digital system offers all requirements for proper anonymous secure online voting: 1. you can only vote once; 2. you can verify your vote was properly counted; 3. others cannot find out how you voted, even with your cooperation.
We'll see whether someone will ever come up with some system satisfying them all...
We'll see whether someone will ever come up with some system satisfying them all...
Basically bitcoin becomes digital gold, and I think that's the most likely outcome of it.
Can you elaborate on how that is going to happen? Not trying to flame, I can see a world where people use BTC for everything, but I am confused at how that will happen with current valuation.
BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket? will there be some adjustment? How will other entities handle conversion and exchange? Will the general population have some compulsatory event to liquidate their own bank accounts into BTC funds?
Could this change asset valuation worldwide(Real estate, investment funds, etc)? If no government entity mediates currency value and printing can they tax your earnings if companies pay through some decentralized medium? What happens when nobody is paying taxes?
How about other cryptocurrencies, is there some kind of zero-sum game race to the top going on? Can they co-exist in the long term purist scenario?
Some of these questions are probably extremely stupid as I have little financial and economics knowledge and I am almost illiterate when it comes to Bitcoin, and I don't know how it works for the average joe if this purist scenario becomes true.
BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket? will there be some adjustment? How will other entities handle conversion and exchange? Will the general population have some compulsatory event to liquidate their own bank accounts into BTC funds?
Could this change asset valuation worldwide(Real estate, investment funds, etc)? If no government entity mediates currency value and printing can they tax your earnings if companies pay through some decentralized medium? What happens when nobody is paying taxes?
How about other cryptocurrencies, is there some kind of zero-sum game race to the top going on? Can they co-exist in the long term purist scenario?
Some of these questions are probably extremely stupid as I have little financial and economics knowledge and I am almost illiterate when it comes to Bitcoin, and I don't know how it works for the average joe if this purist scenario becomes true.
I'm not an expert on BTC or anything. In fact I'm not even long on BTC. I don't think it will work in the long term. That said I'm just answering questions as I understand them:
> BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket? will there be some adjustment?
The block chain supports values as small as 0.00000001 BTC (called a Satoshi). More terms will be coined as more common denominations eventually are used to buy things.
> How will other entities handle conversion and exchange? Will the general population have some compulsatory event to liquidate their own bank accounts into BTC funds?
There will be no single event, over time people will simply not use their local currency any more in favor of BTC. Slowly, over time, the population will lose trust in fiat and gain trust in BTC. This may occur over decades or more.
> Could this change asset valuation worldwide(Real estate, investment funds, etc)? If no government entity mediates currency value and printing can they tax your earnings if companies pay through some decentralized medium? What happens when nobody is paying taxes?
I'm not sure about these. Right now if you sell things for BTC I'm pretty sure you have to pay taxes on the "fair market value" of the BTC, which I have no idea what that would be (maybe the average price at the time of the payment?). I assume people long on BTC are hoping laws will adapt by the point when it is widely accepted.
> How about other cryptocurrencies, is there some kind of zero-sum game race to the top going on? Can they co-exist in the long term purist scenario?
I mean, a cryptocurrency is only as valuable as the trust people have in it. So all the same rules/theories apply to other cryptos the same as BTC. BTC just happens to be the most popular at the moment, and therefore has the highest market cap (not even sure if this term applies).
> BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket? will there be some adjustment?
The block chain supports values as small as 0.00000001 BTC (called a Satoshi). More terms will be coined as more common denominations eventually are used to buy things.
> How will other entities handle conversion and exchange? Will the general population have some compulsatory event to liquidate their own bank accounts into BTC funds?
There will be no single event, over time people will simply not use their local currency any more in favor of BTC. Slowly, over time, the population will lose trust in fiat and gain trust in BTC. This may occur over decades or more.
> Could this change asset valuation worldwide(Real estate, investment funds, etc)? If no government entity mediates currency value and printing can they tax your earnings if companies pay through some decentralized medium? What happens when nobody is paying taxes?
I'm not sure about these. Right now if you sell things for BTC I'm pretty sure you have to pay taxes on the "fair market value" of the BTC, which I have no idea what that would be (maybe the average price at the time of the payment?). I assume people long on BTC are hoping laws will adapt by the point when it is widely accepted.
> How about other cryptocurrencies, is there some kind of zero-sum game race to the top going on? Can they co-exist in the long term purist scenario?
I mean, a cryptocurrency is only as valuable as the trust people have in it. So all the same rules/theories apply to other cryptos the same as BTC. BTC just happens to be the most popular at the moment, and therefore has the highest market cap (not even sure if this term applies).
>There will be no single event, over time people will simply
not use their local currency any more in favor of BTC.
Slowly, over time, the population will lose trust in fiat
and gain trust in BTC. This may occur over decades or more.
(Consider: is what they're telling you based on their current investments that they'll sell off after you've bought in? Now think of what happens when a hedge fund, or other early adopter who has acquired several thousand coins or if there's whales who've traded their way to now own %10 of the coin supply in the network. What happens if they divest and crash the 'value' of this coin 'investment'?)
The great thing about cryptocoins is you can create an improved protocol and if it's better then previous protocols, the users will migrate.
There's a lot of misinformation flying around because people are trying to spam their investments into their cryptocoin service networks which they've bought into (or engineered a marketing pump and dump scam, i.e. premined ICOs like antshares) in hopes that they can later sell at excessively inflated prices because of some arbitrarily limited "supply" which a programmer just typed into the software running their network.
> BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket?
This is moot until/unless BTC undergoes significant changes. It's not suited for this kind of transaction at all, IMO.
But let's say confirmation times were orders of magnitude faster and we wanted to cross the threshold to supermarket transactions. I think we'd still denominate the purchases in the local fiat currency anyways. The only way this would change is if producers and distributors had their costs anchored in BTC. But this seems very unlikely to occur in the next decade.
This is moot until/unless BTC undergoes significant changes. It's not suited for this kind of transaction at all, IMO.
But let's say confirmation times were orders of magnitude faster and we wanted to cross the threshold to supermarket transactions. I think we'd still denominate the purchases in the local fiat currency anyways. The only way this would change is if producers and distributors had their costs anchored in BTC. But this seems very unlikely to occur in the next decade.
Most wallets have started communicating values in "mBTC" - whose price is within an order of magnitude of a dollar.
What is Bitcoin doing? The BTC network is a service. At the time of this writing, there are upwards of 30-100+ functioning cryptocoin networks which offer the same distributed ledger functionality of BTC wallets and a few with more unique features and trustworthy dev teams.
The arbitrary supply of and rules which define how minted coins are rewarded is an important aspect of each of these cryptocurrencies, and if the limited edition deflationary aspect was valuable then maybe we should all buy into that BTC clone with 42 coins in "circulation".
BTC isn't rare, it's just the AOL of cryptocoins right now. Slow and over priced. There are better alternatives.
The arbitrary supply of and rules which define how minted coins are rewarded is an important aspect of each of these cryptocurrencies, and if the limited edition deflationary aspect was valuable then maybe we should all buy into that BTC clone with 42 coins in "circulation".
BTC isn't rare, it's just the AOL of cryptocoins right now. Slow and over priced. There are better alternatives.
Bitcoin is deflationary by design. This is problematic for any country to then adopt, as it removes a major economic lever.
>BTC is worth thousands of dollars, so if everyone starts using BTC will people pay irrational fractions of BTC for bread and milk at the supermarket? will there be some adjustment?
"1 bitcoin" is a truly arbitrary amount, just like "1 pound of gold" is arbitrary. They're both divisible.
"1 bitcoin" is a truly arbitrary amount, just like "1 pound of gold" is arbitrary. They're both divisible.
You don't measure inches in miles. You use a unit suitable to your needs.
Not sure why you'd be downvoted. This is what some purists think and it's a popular meme. [1]
[1] http://imgur.com/gE8hDnY
[1] http://imgur.com/gE8hDnY
Is it a big deal that a BTC can never be lost and later found?
On a long enough timeline, won't lost credentials result in BTC that are functionally permanently out of circulation?
On a long enough timeline, won't lost credentials result in BTC that are functionally permanently out of circulation?
Interesting question. Since there's a limited supply theoretically on a long enough timeline every BTC will be lost.
Currently Bitcoins can be divided to 8 decimal places, and if eventually that's not enough the protocol can be upgraded.
Correct - you can increase the units in circulation without destroying the purchasing power of those who currently hold the asset, which is a huge advantage over traditional fiat currency.
You can do the same with fiat currencies. It's called redenomination [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redenomination
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redenomination
> ~21 million BTC is the max that can ever exist at once
Just to clarify: it's not that there can only be 21 million BTC 'at once'...unless there's a big change in its design that the majority support.
There will only be 21 million BTC ever. If the keys for 1 million of them are lost, then those will never be replaced.
Just to clarify: it's not that there can only be 21 million BTC 'at once'...unless there's a big change in its design that the majority support.
There will only be 21 million BTC ever. If the keys for 1 million of them are lost, then those will never be replaced.
> Do you spend dollars today wondering if tomorrow the Euro will be worth more or less? No
Actually, yes; there's plenty of countries where they use the USD or Euro instead of their local currency because the local currency suffers from high inflation or instability. There's other countries where the currency is tightly linked to the dollar. Both because the dollar is a stable currency, one that isn't influenced by supply / demand like BTC is - BTC is a finite resource, dollars are theoretically infinite.
Actually, yes; there's plenty of countries where they use the USD or Euro instead of their local currency because the local currency suffers from high inflation or instability. There's other countries where the currency is tightly linked to the dollar. Both because the dollar is a stable currency, one that isn't influenced by supply / demand like BTC is - BTC is a finite resource, dollars are theoretically infinite.
But be careful about only mentioning the views of "Bitcoin purists." That sounds like a pretty extreme view, and will be dismissed as a straw man by the Bitcoin fans or optimists, who likely vastly outnumber the "purists."
> Do you spend dollars today wondering if tomorrow the Euro will be worth more or less? No, so why would you care what the dollar equivalent to a BTC is when everything you buy is priced in BTC?
Moving the analogy a bit: everything we buy is priced in Reais. However, we still care if tomorrow the Dollar is worth more or less, since it does impact the price of several kinds of goods. For instance, the Dollar increasing in value will lead to computers getting more expensive.
In the same way, even if everything were to be priced in Bitcoins, the exchange rate between Bitcoin and USD would still be significant, unless and until the USD ceased to exist.
Moving the analogy a bit: everything we buy is priced in Reais. However, we still care if tomorrow the Dollar is worth more or less, since it does impact the price of several kinds of goods. For instance, the Dollar increasing in value will lead to computers getting more expensive.
In the same way, even if everything were to be priced in Bitcoins, the exchange rate between Bitcoin and USD would still be significant, unless and until the USD ceased to exist.
But this is exactly the point - in countries where the local currency versus USD has had volatility comparable to BTC, it's been a big problem. E.g. in South Korea, where the volatility (and general upwards trend) in the Won last year was an order of magnitude less than BTC, the currency fluctuations have caused major losses and uncertainty for exporters. If you walk around Seoul, there are signs everywhere showing the current exchange rate.
Of course that will never happen in our lifetimes because in the real world people and companies have to pay taxes. The larger sovereign states — which exercise effective monopolies on violence over geographic areas — won't agree to accept payments in cryptocurrencies which they can't control. Even if you conduct transactions in BTC or something similar you'll eventually have to exchange it for the local fiat currency to pay taxes.
> So, theoretically if you replaced the world's currencies with BTC, having a single BTC would make you incredibly wealthy.
The rules can and have changed with just majority (of compute power) consensus through forks. They could be changed to make it inflationary.
The rules can and have changed with just majority (of compute power) consensus through forks. They could be changed to make it inflationary.
I think traditional currency can remain solvent longer than cryptocurrency can remain irrational.
If/when the limit of 21 million is reached, the miners would/will increase the limit. Over time the incentives of BTC holders and BTC miners diverge. One of the many reasons a viable PoS is important, as it merges these two groups into one.
I know it doesn't specifically answer your question, but my understanding is that a majority of 'we accept bitcoin' businesses use a service to translate it in to their native currency at the time of sale (or very shortly after), and often will list their prices in the native currency (rather than BTC + constant adjustment).
As a someone looking make purchases with BTC; if the value of a BTC is going up, why would I use it to buy anything? It's gone up $700 in the last week; up $200 in the last 24 hours alone. I'd feel incredible silly spending bitcoin in a growth phase.
Why do you spend any currency when you can buy Bitcoins instead, let it grow and then sell them back into the original currency?
Any reason you can give applies to spending Bitcoin.
Why do you spend any currency when you can buy Bitcoins instead, let it grow and then sell them back into the original currency?
Any reason you can give applies to spending Bitcoin.
Not sure that really applies. You NEED to buy things. Rent/mortgage. Food. Transportation expenses. The guy's right - at this point, why would you ever spend BTC on those transactions when you can spend $ instead?
The reason why you spend any currency instead of buying BTC is because you need to. Not because you're willingly buying something unnecessary to forsake potential earnings in the future.
The reason why you spend any currency instead of buying BTC is because you need to. Not because you're willingly buying something unnecessary to forsake potential earnings in the future.
Right. I'm not in any disputing Gresham's law; if you have enough USD to cover an expense, you're surely spending it first.
But the idea that "the reason why you spend any currency instead of buying BTC is because you need to" is just plain wrong. You're essentially saying that people spend strictly what they need to live and save every penny beyond that, and can only wonder whatever led you to that conclusion.
But the idea that "the reason why you spend any currency instead of buying BTC is because you need to" is just plain wrong. You're essentially saying that people spend strictly what they need to live and save every penny beyond that, and can only wonder whatever led you to that conclusion.
[deleted]
Fascinating how many questions / comments in this thread question if crypto currency macro even has a use case in this world.
And for good reason.
Is it a currency? Yes and no.
Is it a store of value? Yes and no but sure is volatile.
Is primary use case illegal transactions? Definitely, sometimes.
Is it a anarchist mechanism to shelter wealth and detach from any nation state? Yes absolutely, probably most of the China money that drove the last price bump was getting cash out of China.
Is it a pyramid scheme? Absolutely in many cases, ICOs are making this way easier.
The answer I've arrived at, and why I am compelled by crypto is that in each use case above it has the potential to be the BIGGEST, at a scale never recognized before.
EG
Crypto could be the biggest currency. All it takes is adoption and figuring out scaling. Way easier to transact in a flat-world with a portable currency.
Crypto could be the biggest store of value. The beautiful math behind bitcoin (and others) is self-limiting creating real scarcity. With mass adoption will come stability.
Crypto could drive the majority of illegal transactions. If they figure out privacy more completely it's the perfect mechanism.
Crypto could become the "people's" wealth vault, and undercut nations ability to tax & control markets by truly privatizing wealth. All it takes is MOST of us to decide.
And finally, because it's entertaining to think about, Crypto could drive the biggest pyramid scheme the world has ever seen. There is absolutely no SOFTWARE of structural limitation to running a $1 trillion dollar end game pyramid on Crypto. In fact you figure out the privacy side, add in mass adoption and you could just leverage the current ICO structure for it.
I love crypto because it's boundless.
You have to have some imagination and blind faith to believe any of the use cases above will become true.
But the fun part is there is no limiter on any of those things becoming true.
And for good reason.
Is it a currency? Yes and no.
Is it a store of value? Yes and no but sure is volatile.
Is primary use case illegal transactions? Definitely, sometimes.
Is it a anarchist mechanism to shelter wealth and detach from any nation state? Yes absolutely, probably most of the China money that drove the last price bump was getting cash out of China.
Is it a pyramid scheme? Absolutely in many cases, ICOs are making this way easier.
The answer I've arrived at, and why I am compelled by crypto is that in each use case above it has the potential to be the BIGGEST, at a scale never recognized before.
EG
Crypto could be the biggest currency. All it takes is adoption and figuring out scaling. Way easier to transact in a flat-world with a portable currency.
Crypto could be the biggest store of value. The beautiful math behind bitcoin (and others) is self-limiting creating real scarcity. With mass adoption will come stability.
Crypto could drive the majority of illegal transactions. If they figure out privacy more completely it's the perfect mechanism.
Crypto could become the "people's" wealth vault, and undercut nations ability to tax & control markets by truly privatizing wealth. All it takes is MOST of us to decide.
And finally, because it's entertaining to think about, Crypto could drive the biggest pyramid scheme the world has ever seen. There is absolutely no SOFTWARE of structural limitation to running a $1 trillion dollar end game pyramid on Crypto. In fact you figure out the privacy side, add in mass adoption and you could just leverage the current ICO structure for it.
I love crypto because it's boundless.
You have to have some imagination and blind faith to believe any of the use cases above will become true.
But the fun part is there is no limiter on any of those things becoming true.
>And finally, because it's entertaining to think about, Crypto could drive the biggest pyramid scheme the world has ever seen. There is absolutely no SOFTWARE of structural limitation to running a $1 trillion dollar end game pyramid on Crypto. In fact you figure out the privacy side, add in mass adoption and you could just leverage the current ICO structure for it.
Couldn't Crypto itself be the big pyramid scheme? It might never get adopted enough to become the defacto currency (can you imagine the gov't accepting BTC for tax payments?). In the meantime the SEC, or Congress, or maybe some big, multilateral "anti-money laundering" international agreement might do something that threatens it enough to start a run on the "bank", driving the exchange rate to nothing. Those who bought a ton a long time ago and who since cashed out would then be the winners. No?
Couldn't Crypto itself be the big pyramid scheme? It might never get adopted enough to become the defacto currency (can you imagine the gov't accepting BTC for tax payments?). In the meantime the SEC, or Congress, or maybe some big, multilateral "anti-money laundering" international agreement might do something that threatens it enough to start a run on the "bank", driving the exchange rate to nothing. Those who bought a ton a long time ago and who since cashed out would then be the winners. No?
The biggest pyramid scheme is the fed
Exactly. Though I think that so many people having invested so much money at such an early stage in this technology's development is the reason why the scrutiny is off the charts. Everyone, from naysayers to evangelists, need to cool off a bit and realize that this stuff is brand new. I'm 110% confident that cryptocurrency in general will yield some very interesting things in the next few decades. But I'm 0% confident that anyone today has a grasp on what those things will be specifically. We should all just be having fun with it and seeing what we can make.
What's weird is how often I see this argument and how loudly it contrasts with the speed of software development and the variety of preposterous things already being attempted in the space.
You say that like most of these things are good? I wouldn't consider boundless tax evasion or a boundless pyramid scheme "the fun part".
I am illustrating use cases, not advocating - I think my excitement about the tech was poorly communicated as excitement for the chaos.
But the minute you realize the use case around privatization of global wealth / taxes and/or pyramiding you can begin to underwrite its probability.
I think mass adoption - tied to the use cases I illustrate - has a high probability because people act primarily in their self interests.
Crypto is pretty neatly aligned with self interest.
Until we devolve into total anarchy of course ;)
But the minute you realize the use case around privatization of global wealth / taxes and/or pyramiding you can begin to underwrite its probability.
I think mass adoption - tied to the use cases I illustrate - has a high probability because people act primarily in their self interests.
Crypto is pretty neatly aligned with self interest.
Until we devolve into total anarchy of course ;)
Even though Bitcoin was initially called a cryptocurrency, I think it's now becoming more clear that cryptocurrencies are more like "cryptoassets" [1] or crypto commodities.
Some of the people who started calling it digital gold a while back got it right. Using Bitcoin is more like using gold (not necessarily physical gold) to pay for stuff. Gold's value also fluctuates significantly over one year's time.
[1] - https://medium.com/@cburniske/why-i-like-the-term-cryptoasse...
Some of the people who started calling it digital gold a while back got it right. Using Bitcoin is more like using gold (not necessarily physical gold) to pay for stuff. Gold's value also fluctuates significantly over one year's time.
[1] - https://medium.com/@cburniske/why-i-like-the-term-cryptoasse...
That's questionable. I believe there may be an issue with the economic model if there aren't sufficient transactions (once the issuance starts to slow). Not enough crypto for the miners. They then don't support the network. The network is then less secure. The price then reflects the lack of security.
There's thinking that the winning crypto(s) currency will be both gold + currency.
There's thinking that the winning crypto(s) currency will be both gold + currency.
For an entire half-decade there have been payment processors that made it seamless for businesses to accept bitcoin and cash some or all of it out immediately if they wanted to.
If it takes a $100 million fund raise article for you to ask why everyone else isn't crazy, c'est la vie. People look for validation all manner of ways.
Coinbase also has merchant services that allow for immediate cash outs. This is probably one of cryptocurrency's smallest markets.
If it takes a $100 million fund raise article for you to ask why everyone else isn't crazy, c'est la vie. People look for validation all manner of ways.
Coinbase also has merchant services that allow for immediate cash outs. This is probably one of cryptocurrency's smallest markets.
I'm not sure I follow what you're saying in the first two sentences? Neat to know that you can cash out immediately though; that makes more sense.
Are the vendors that accept BTC pricing their goods based on the current exchange rate for 1 BTC? ie. I price product A at $1500USD, I then say I accept BTC, so when someone puts it in the shopping cart it converts $1500USD to BTC and charges them that amount?
Sorry, just not familiar and trying to figure out how it works. I haven't came across anyone that accepts BTC (although I haven't looked either).
Are the vendors that accept BTC pricing their goods based on the current exchange rate for 1 BTC? ie. I price product A at $1500USD, I then say I accept BTC, so when someone puts it in the shopping cart it converts $1500USD to BTC and charges them that amount?
Sorry, just not familiar and trying to figure out how it works. I haven't came across anyone that accepts BTC (although I haven't looked either).
Some vendors and some listing sites show at least two exchange rates. National currency and the cryptocurrency of choice.
Stripe and Coinbase give the options of automatic conversion to the cryptocurrency exchange rate when displaying it.
Some merchants, usually more established ones like Microsoft, Newegg, Namecheap, typically won't show the bitcoin price until you chose that option and they generate the timed invoice.
Stripe and Coinbase give the options of automatic conversion to the cryptocurrency exchange rate when displaying it.
Some merchants, usually more established ones like Microsoft, Newegg, Namecheap, typically won't show the bitcoin price until you chose that option and they generate the timed invoice.
Interesting, thanks!
It's useful for donating to WikiLeaks when the banks are blocking those.
https://wikileaks.org/Banking-Blockade.html
https://wikileaks.org/Banking-Blockade.html
Its also used to purchase other cryptocurrencies.
Trades ride the volatility of USD/BTC, as well as the XXX/BTC.
In extreme cases you have USD/BTC, BTC/XXX, XXX/YYY!
While there is a large number of LTC, BTC and ETH exchanged for fiat (USD, EUR, RMB, KRW); Most of the trades are between BTC and alts - https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/volume/24-hour/
While there is a large number of LTC, BTC and ETH exchanged for fiat (USD, EUR, RMB, KRW); Most of the trades are between BTC and alts - https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/volume/24-hour/
> When a business accepts bitcoins for payment, there generally is the need to convert them to the currencies used for paying suppliers, employees and shareholders. Some merchants set prices based on the current market rate at the time the price quote is presented to the customer
Bitcoin Prices lists the exchange rate for many currencies on multiple exchanges.
When prices are determined using an automated process, the current market rate can be based on either a current price or on a weighted average basis.
When bitcoin funds for purchases are received, some merchants instantly exchange those proceeds into the preferred currency used. Hedging for each transaction can nearly entirely eliminate exchange rate risk that the business is exposed to when accepting bitcoins for payment. [1]
So it sounds like merchants accept Bitcoin and immediately convert to preferred currency based on the going BTC rate at the time of transaction.
[1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_to_accept_Bitcoin,_for_small_...
So it sounds like merchants accept Bitcoin and immediately convert to preferred currency based on the going BTC rate at the time of transaction.
[1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_to_accept_Bitcoin,_for_small_...
It's the same as exchange rates, constantly being recalculated. Though crypotcurrencies are orders of magnitude more volatile. A seller will set their price in USD (or other established fiat), and convert the price to bitcoin at the time of transaction.
As far as cryptocurrencies are concerned, I personally view BTC as a good store of value; it's slow and expensive to transfer compared to other coins.
As far as cryptocurrencies are concerned, I personally view BTC as a good store of value; it's slow and expensive to transfer compared to other coins.
"As a someone looking make purchases with BTC; if the value of a BTC is going up, why would I use it to buy anything? It's gone up $700 in the last week; up $200 in the last 24 hours alone. I'd feel incredible silly spending bitcoin in a growth phase."
If it goes up so much, isn't it incredibly silly for you to not buy any? See, the reason why you haven't bought BTC yet is the same reason why BTC is still used to buy things. BTC might go down tomorrow, so why not spend it today and get more bang for your buck now.
Case in point: I've personally spent ~100 BTC over the years (buying domain names, Steam games, paying my CPA, buying on Newegg, eating at Charlie Shrem's bar in NYC, etc.)
If it goes up so much, isn't it incredibly silly for you to not buy any? See, the reason why you haven't bought BTC yet is the same reason why BTC is still used to buy things. BTC might go down tomorrow, so why not spend it today and get more bang for your buck now.
Case in point: I've personally spent ~100 BTC over the years (buying domain names, Steam games, paying my CPA, buying on Newegg, eating at Charlie Shrem's bar in NYC, etc.)
>The value of it fluctuates so much that actually buying/accepting it seems incredibly risky. The price can go down just as fast as it goes up.
Why? If someone sends me 1BTC I'll just instantly sell 1BTC, it is tremendously unlikely that I'm gonna get screwed even if there's a 1-2 second delay.
>if the value of a BTC is going up, why would I use it to buy anything?
Because you want things and not numbers on the internet.
>As someone looking to accept BTC for purchases, how do I do so with confidence that when I accepted $3400 today that by the time I cash out it's not worth $2700?
By being smart and not waiting to cash out. Your maximum loss will be the value of whatever buffer coins you hold, and I guess you could hedge around that too.
Why? If someone sends me 1BTC I'll just instantly sell 1BTC, it is tremendously unlikely that I'm gonna get screwed even if there's a 1-2 second delay.
>if the value of a BTC is going up, why would I use it to buy anything?
Because you want things and not numbers on the internet.
>As someone looking to accept BTC for purchases, how do I do so with confidence that when I accepted $3400 today that by the time I cash out it's not worth $2700?
By being smart and not waiting to cash out. Your maximum loss will be the value of whatever buffer coins you hold, and I guess you could hedge around that too.
There is no 1-2 second delay tho; bitcoin transactions take 1 hour to confirm. At best, you might have 7 blocks between receiving, sending and being credited on the exchange.
Of course, this is possibly things like Litecoin are more stable as you can 'get in and out' in 15 minutes.
Of course, this is possibly things like Litecoin are more stable as you can 'get in and out' in 15 minutes.
Some places will allow immediate conversion to dollars. I know bitpay used to facilitate that.
Bitpay was cashing to fiat from unconfirmed bitcoin tx's? SMH
If its a bitpay to bitpay tx its all internal and likely didnt actually touch the bitcoin blockchain.
If its a bitpay to bitpay tx its all internal and likely didnt actually touch the bitcoin blockchain.
This was merchant payments. Essentially bitpay guaranteed the USD you would get at the point the transaction occurred. They didn't send the USD, that happened a day later.
So buyer pays in btc, bitpay handle the transaction, probably sell the same amount on an exchange at that point, tx confirms and they pay out the USD. The BTC then goes into the bitpay reserve for the next merchant.
So buyer pays in btc, bitpay handle the transaction, probably sell the same amount on an exchange at that point, tx confirms and they pay out the USD. The BTC then goes into the bitpay reserve for the next merchant.
Note that they guarantee the exchange rate, assuming the transaction is eventually confirmed. https://support.bitpay.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002990823-Ho...
[deleted]
You don't need to move the coins to an exchange to effectively lock in an exchange rate for them.
Buy and sell limits prevent using coinbase to trade BTC like a stock unless you're talking extremely low limits or extremely long term (like a retirement fund, which I wouldn't recommend)
So the liquidity is weird, I can turn less than $15K into USD in a few moments, but $15001 will take me two weeks and is scary given volatility. I would argue this intentional as in this is why coinbase isn't very useful for drug money laundering.
I once bought a commemorative Swiss Army knife with Debian Linux branding and spent like $200 on nickel and time fees to buy a $100 knife. The numbers are only slightly exaggerated. Transferring money is incredibly expensive.
So the liquidity is weird, I can turn less than $15K into USD in a few moments, but $15001 will take me two weeks and is scary given volatility. I would argue this intentional as in this is why coinbase isn't very useful for drug money laundering.
I once bought a commemorative Swiss Army knife with Debian Linux branding and spent like $200 on nickel and time fees to buy a $100 knife. The numbers are only slightly exaggerated. Transferring money is incredibly expensive.
It is possible for a business to accept bitcoin and immediately have it converted to dollars so they are not exposed to the currency risk but get the benefits of irreversible payments, so little chance for fraud.
That's what 99% of the businesses that accept Bitcoin (that aren't themselves crypto-coin based businesses) do. Overstock is a counter-example. They keep 50% of the BTC they collect now as investment.
Can I get a bank account which works like a normal bank- accepts EFTs in dollars, has a debit card which pays in dollars, but where my balance is stored in BTC and everything is exchanged to/from BTC at the current rate on the fly? With enough of a balance, it seems like I'd be able to weather any fluctuations in the exchange rate and my funds would for the most part appreciate at a much greater rate than the measly interest on a savings account. Does that exist? Would that be a terrible idea?
Something like Bitpay guarantees the exchange rate for 15 minutes between invoicing the customer and conversion to USD.
More generally, you'd outsource those risks to dedicated finance companies and handle USD: Exchange rate risk, fee calculation risk, confirmation/double-spending risk, etc. Just like in how there is an entire shell game of risks being offloaded between companies when you accept credit cards, and no merchant directly accepts credit from an unknown customer.
More generally, you'd outsource those risks to dedicated finance companies and handle USD: Exchange rate risk, fee calculation risk, confirmation/double-spending risk, etc. Just like in how there is an entire shell game of risks being offloaded between companies when you accept credit cards, and no merchant directly accepts credit from an unknown customer.
Don't get hung up the price fluctuations if all you want to do is use it for transacting. You will only be exposed to BTC price fluctuations for a few seconds or minutes. There's a bilateral parasitic relationship between those who want to use it for transactions and those who want to speculate on its value.
>As someone looking to accept BTC for purchases, how do I do so with confidence that when I accepted $3400 today that by the time I cash out it's not worth $2700?
You can accept BTC and convert it to cash instantly upon acceptance if you want.
You can accept BTC and convert it to cash instantly upon acceptance if you want.
[deleted]
Bitcoin transactions in which the payee retains the currency instead of immediately exchanging it for USD, EUR, GBP, or another usual currency are largely done for illicit purchases, especially those involving narcotics.
This is done because Bitcoin is extremely easy to launder through "tumblers". Unlike, say, paper currency, an individual 'unit' of Bitcoin (insofar as that exists) is not tracked with a serial number.
Additionally, in the US, the IRS is underfunded and prolific sellers are smart. Unlike banks, Bitcoin does not inherently have names attached to accounts/wallets, and so it is much easier to evade taxes than with typical currencies.
This is done because Bitcoin is extremely easy to launder through "tumblers". Unlike, say, paper currency, an individual 'unit' of Bitcoin (insofar as that exists) is not tracked with a serial number.
Additionally, in the US, the IRS is underfunded and prolific sellers are smart. Unlike banks, Bitcoin does not inherently have names attached to accounts/wallets, and so it is much easier to evade taxes than with typical currencies.
TL;DR: holding Bitcoin means you're probably a criminal.
Are there any instruments like options or futures for btc? Seems like these could be used to solve this issue.
Yes, some of the chinese exchanges offer futures contracts.
The larger western exchanges offer leverage (and its other peoples funds earning interest, currently ~0.015%/day).
There is also mining contracts which are a form of derivative.
Also -- none of these deriv's provide any solution to volatility (possibly make it worse?)
The larger western exchanges offer leverage (and its other peoples funds earning interest, currently ~0.015%/day).
There is also mining contracts which are a form of derivative.
Also -- none of these deriv's provide any solution to volatility (possibly make it worse?)
futures + debt based investing are the two canaries of market crashes. It was true in 2008, 2000, 1987, 1929, 1873, ... heck all the way back to tulip mania or arguably the financial panic of 33AD.
The question of "who's buying, how many of them are there, how long do they intend to hold for, and how are they buying?" you can't answer for sure, but when the capital to buy starts getting more scarce and people start leveraging other assets to continue buying...you'll get to a point where market velocity surpasses speculative velocity and the leveraging ability of the buyer.
In the physical world, this is a vendor of widgets on the street and a buying frenzy. Buyers spend money on the widgets and turn around and open up their own widget shop as sellers to feed the craze. Eventually enough buyers are converted into sellers, not enough buyers remain and the price crashes.
Futures contracts are a form of credit in this model. Bitcoin's crashed 4 times in 6 years - don't think it won't happen again.
The question of "who's buying, how many of them are there, how long do they intend to hold for, and how are they buying?" you can't answer for sure, but when the capital to buy starts getting more scarce and people start leveraging other assets to continue buying...you'll get to a point where market velocity surpasses speculative velocity and the leveraging ability of the buyer.
In the physical world, this is a vendor of widgets on the street and a buying frenzy. Buyers spend money on the widgets and turn around and open up their own widget shop as sellers to feed the craze. Eventually enough buyers are converted into sellers, not enough buyers remain and the price crashes.
Futures contracts are a form of credit in this model. Bitcoin's crashed 4 times in 6 years - don't think it won't happen again.
Exactly this - futures denoted in BTC will turn it into a real currency.
It requires buy in from many parties - suppliers of materials to manufacturers, manufacturers of products, merchants reselling products, etc.
The entire chain can be stabilized with futures so then bitcoin doesn't need to be converted immediately to another currency.
It requires buy in from many parties - suppliers of materials to manufacturers, manufacturers of products, merchants reselling products, etc.
The entire chain can be stabilized with futures so then bitcoin doesn't need to be converted immediately to another currency.
[deleted]
Initially people did use to to buy stuff, but it there isn't really an advantage over credit cards. Now people just want to buy it because it keeps going up in price. Classic Pyramid get rich scheme.
1) you don't really know that its value will go up, the past doesn't guarantee the future
2) money itself is useless, people like spending it
3) why would you buy computer/phone today if you can buy it next year for half the price?
2) money itself is useless, people like spending it
3) why would you buy computer/phone today if you can buy it next year for half the price?
Coinbase makes a killing with their fees. The spread between the buy and sell prices on coinbase are 1-1.2%. On top, their bank transfer charges are proportional to amount transferred instead of standard flat fee. I wonder why they need another $100M !
For people who want to buy, I would recommend Kraken - they have much higher volume and sane pricing. There are others too like Bitfinex, Poloneix, etc.
For people who want to buy, I would recommend Kraken - they have much higher volume and sane pricing. There are others too like Bitfinex, Poloneix, etc.
It's important to note that Coinbase also operates an exchange, GDAX, that anyone can get access to. The fees for limit orders on GDAX are currently 0%, and there are no transaction fees for withdrawal (at least on USD->Bank account or BTC withdrawals). I'm not sure if GDAX has any deposit fees.
Buying/selling directly on Coinbase is merely for convenience, and obviously you're going to pay for that convenience. I'm glad that Coinbase offers that option, because there are a lot of people for whom the fees are worth the ease of use.
But if you're one of those people for whom the fees aren't worth it, and you want to get your hands dirty, by all means use GDAX and pay no fees at all.
Buying/selling directly on Coinbase is merely for convenience, and obviously you're going to pay for that convenience. I'm glad that Coinbase offers that option, because there are a lot of people for whom the fees are worth the ease of use.
But if you're one of those people for whom the fees aren't worth it, and you want to get your hands dirty, by all means use GDAX and pay no fees at all.
No deposit or withdrawal fees for GDAX, and it's instant to move funds to/from Coinbase wallets.
the fees for market making orders is 0% other orders is about 0.25% (better if you are trading more). market making is when you place an order that is not instantaneously filled.
[deleted]
I was wondering the same thing. At the volume GDAX is processing ($100M/day [0]) they should be making $100M in gross profit every year [1].
[0] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/volume/24-hour/#gdax [1] $100M * 0.0025 = $250K /day, or almost $91M per year.
[0] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/volume/24-hour/#gdax [1] $100M * 0.0025 = $250K /day, or almost $91M per year.
There is currently a 0% fee for "market making," or when you do a limit buy/sell. The 0.3% fee only applies when you make a market transaction (instantly filled) [0].
[0]: https://www.gdax.com/fees/ETH-USD
[0]: https://www.gdax.com/fees/ETH-USD
One of the two parties is paying the market-making, the other the market taking fee. So for every transaction, there is always a 0% + 0.3% total commission for Gdax.
(note, large customers get a discount on the taker fee, so I went with 0.25% on average)
(note, large customers get a discount on the taker fee, so I went with 0.25% on average)
> their bank transfer charges are proportional to amount transferred instead of standard flat fee.
I don't think that is true. From everything I've seen they only charge a nominal fee of 15 cents to do an ACH transfer.
I don't think that is true. From everything I've seen they only charge a nominal fee of 15 cents to do an ACH transfer.
There is a $0.15 minimum in the US, but they will take the max of that or 1.49% (to a bank account) [1]. Different countries and output methods vary, but most are proportional to the amount transferred.
[1]: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/210...
[1]: https://support.coinbase.com/customer/en/portal/articles/210...
The fee is not on the transfer, but on the conversion.
ACH deposit to USD wallet is free. Converting that USD to BTC or ETH is where the fee comes in. (Why one would want to deposit USD at Coinbase and leave it there, though, is another question...)
ACH deposit to USD wallet is free. Converting that USD to BTC or ETH is where the fee comes in. (Why one would want to deposit USD at Coinbase and leave it there, though, is another question...)
Even in the bitcoin community, I think many people don't realize just how big Coinbase is. I have a paid Alexa account, so I can grab traffic data to for any website. Let me show you how Coinbase compares to several other sites you guys might be familiar with:
Let me repeat that again: The largest bitcoin exchange has 1/10 of the traffic of the biggest general banking site in the world.
That is huge.
coinbase.com - 4.8 million monthly unique visitors from the US
4chan.org - 5.3 million
chase.com - 47 million
Let me repeat that again: The largest bitcoin exchange has 1/10 of the traffic of the biggest general banking site in the world.
That is huge.
Hopefully they spend all $100mm on support. I've never experienced such bad support.
Yes! I've been trying to get an answer about if message signing will ever be fixed for months. They just closed my email ticket saying they're sorry they didn't have time to respond to it.
At this point me and many of friends with Coinbase account came to conclusion that there is NONE. I don't believe a single person works in customer support.
I also heard that it is such a big issue that some California attorney is advertising heavily in top 5 states to gather traction for a class-action lawsuit regarding this problem. Unfortunately I haven't stumbled upon his advertisement yet, but wouldn't be surprised if judge will give it a green light.
I also heard that it is such a big issue that some California attorney is advertising heavily in top 5 states to gather traction for a class-action lawsuit regarding this problem. Unfortunately I haven't stumbled upon his advertisement yet, but wouldn't be surprised if judge will give it a green light.
According to LinkedIn, they have 7 people who work in support.
At a company of ~200 people, that's not an unreasonable number to have. It feels mean to say they have none.
At a company of ~200 people, that's not an unreasonable number to have. It feels mean to say they have none.
You know what I find mean? Getting locked out of my GDAX account for no apparent reason for months on end while ETH rises and I have no way of doing anything because I can't access my USD or ETH. Not one single word from support until one day I get a random message that directs me to an article that I've already read 10 times and is of no help.
[deleted]
Mean to say something? I guess its not mean not to answer to customer support request.
I guess when someone steals your wallet you don't chase them, because that would be mean and not a behavior of a gentleman.
Please point me to Linkedin verification page - you know, where it says that whatever people put on LinkedIn is always true, because so far my experience is contradictory. I worked with many people and they LinkedIn profile is nothing like they responsibilities were.
I guess when someone steals your wallet you don't chase them, because that would be mean and not a behavior of a gentleman.
Please point me to Linkedin verification page - you know, where it says that whatever people put on LinkedIn is always true, because so far my experience is contradictory. I worked with many people and they LinkedIn profile is nothing like they responsibilities were.
A commenter above said they ADDED a million accounts in June. I assume they had some multiple of that already. 7 support people for millions of customers is insanely low, especially for something financial-related.
What type of support?
Definitely late to the game, but finally bought bitcoin this week. I've followed bitcoin since ~2010, but it's volatility and financial constraints had prevented any real action. Here are some notes if there are any other holdouts out there: I used Coinbase and Gemini. It was surprisingly difficult to get money into these places, which was a bit frustrating, but in the same sense reassuring that they are playing by the rules. I actually setup on Gemini because Coinbase kept cancelling orders on my debit card (Schwab), and I was able to setup wire transfer with Gemini, and then transfer that to Coinbase to fund the GDAX account. I set out Saturday morning to buy bitcoin and didn't ultimately have any until Monday afternoon when the wire transfer reached Gemini (standard account for ACH transfer is now approved on both platforms, Gemini took 2 days, Coinbase 4). Coinbase has a nice app to monitor accounts and price charts, but it doesn't seem to link to GDAX (their exchange), so you can't get a unified view of holdings in one spot. Gemini doesn't have an app, but has a web application which is annoyingly secure. It remembers a device for 24 hours, after which it requires 2 Factor SMS verification. Security is great, but it's a bit annoying when all you want to do is check account value once a day. Gemini trading volume seemed a bit low, and their API didn't offer any compelling features over GDAX, which is why I've transferred from Gemini to Coinbase (took about 1.5 hours to go through) and then GDAX (Coinbase to GDAX is instantaneous). Both offer websocket feeds and the APIs are well documented. The C# GDAX sample application was last updated in 2015 interestingly, but it still has many useful pieces. Another bonus for GDAX is their fee structure, which is simpler (and cheaper) than Gemini's, maker orders are 0% fees. I've always been intrigued by automated trading systems, but the barriers to entry are so high in the stock markets (data, platforms, high fees, account minimums, day trading rules), to the point where you can't really just 'try it out.' 6 days into this adventure and I'm maintaining my own order book and programmatically making trades with tiny amounts of money. Next step is to work on strategy.
I have actually already created a C# Gemini API wrapper[0], if you are interested. Along with a GUI for it [1]. Both are open-source.
I used my library to write an automated trading system that's running on Gemini (not open source, obviously). I like Gemini much more than it's competitors.
[0] https://github.com/lazear/Gemini
[1] https://github.com/lazear/Libra
I used my library to write an automated trading system that's running on Gemini (not open source, obviously). I like Gemini much more than it's competitors.
[0] https://github.com/lazear/Gemini
[1] https://github.com/lazear/Libra
Awesome, thank you for sharing, I will check it out!
Coinbase is positioning themselves to be the first legit cryptobank. Fidelity now feeds their customer portfolio data (on BTC, LTC and ETH holdings) from their user cold storage holdings at coinbase.
Its extremely risky to hold client keys that hold money. Making a CryptoBank is like making a regular bank on hard mode.
Its extremely risky to hold client keys that hold money. Making a CryptoBank is like making a regular bank on hard mode.
> Making a CryptoBank is like making a regular bank on hard mode.
Back in "the old days" bank security was based around metal vaults and guns. That I would also consider doing banking on hard mode.
Coinbase just needs good specialist engineers and a good insurance policy. Not much different from a traditional bank.
At least Coinbase has an advantage over traditional banks. Good engineers would probably rather work at Coinbase where they get to play with cool Bitcoin tech, rather than a stuffy old banking system which still limits passwords to 8 characters...
Back in "the old days" bank security was based around metal vaults and guns. That I would also consider doing banking on hard mode.
Coinbase just needs good specialist engineers and a good insurance policy. Not much different from a traditional bank.
At least Coinbase has an advantage over traditional banks. Good engineers would probably rather work at Coinbase where they get to play with cool Bitcoin tech, rather than a stuffy old banking system which still limits passwords to 8 characters...
Insurance on cryptocurrency holdings? might be hard to find a provider that would accept that level of risk and volatility.
Would the premiums increase with the value of the BTC?
What if there just isn't enough bitcoin in circulation to cover the loss (there is a 21 million cap on BTC).
Bank robberies don't usually leave the bank with nothing :-) Exchange gets rolled, it might not even afford the claim.
Agree about advantage as being a great place to work vs traditional banks. They will attract better talent for sure.
What if there just isn't enough bitcoin in circulation to cover the loss (there is a 21 million cap on BTC).
Bank robberies don't usually leave the bank with nothing :-) Exchange gets rolled, it might not even afford the claim.
Agree about advantage as being a great place to work vs traditional banks. They will attract better talent for sure.
> What if there just isn't enough bitcoin in circulation to cover the loss (there is a 21 million cap on BTC).
It's being defacto established that when a cryptobank gets robbed, the funds are repaid to customers using local currency, not BTC, priced at the time of the loss.
So, from the underwriter's perspective, it's just insuring whatever total USD value Coinbase currently holds, with consideration given to Coinbase's ability to prevent theft. Not any different from a bank insuring itself against loss due to cybertheft.
It's being defacto established that when a cryptobank gets robbed, the funds are repaid to customers using local currency, not BTC, priced at the time of the loss.
So, from the underwriter's perspective, it's just insuring whatever total USD value Coinbase currently holds, with consideration given to Coinbase's ability to prevent theft. Not any different from a bank insuring itself against loss due to cybertheft.
Read that again and see why it makes no sense
FDIC makes this analogy a tad more difficult, afaik.
How so? FDIC doesn't cover theft.
I don't think they're going for bank, but the more-lucrative exchange model. "Bank" means ongoing fees but lots of risk. "Exchange" means low-risk transaction fees.
Why does Coinbase need another $100M when it's making tons of money with its fees?
Raise when you don't need it. VCs are desperate to part with cash ("use it or lose it"), and Coinbase probably has the best chance (after perhaps Stripe and Braintree) of becoming the de facto home for the crypto payment/trading industry.
Even so, a 1.6 billion dollar valuation of coinbase is certainly very high. Assuming that over the course of the long term they are comparable to something like intercontinental exchange (the owner of NYSE/EURONEXT, and controller of the clearing house for 50% of the worlds oil futures/derivative products).
The total market cap of coins traded on their platform would need to be magnitudes larger to justify this valuation unless they can somehow either continue to justify their high fees amidst competition, or they would need to totally monopolize all future cryptocurrency banking, something that could certainly involve large amounts of competition in the future as well.
The total market cap of coins traded on their platform would need to be magnitudes larger to justify this valuation unless they can somehow either continue to justify their high fees amidst competition, or they would need to totally monopolize all future cryptocurrency banking, something that could certainly involve large amounts of competition in the future as well.
By deduction they make about a million USD in fees a day. A startup making real cash along with huge growth potential. Seems valid.
Having cash sounds great, but does this kind of cash create a crutch? $100M seems like a large number for CB, but I don't know enough about its business to understand how far that money goes. Is CB growing very quickly and in what ways? Is CB making money on their own?
In order to become the de facto home for crypto payment/trading, what does that mean? Does it mean they need to help make the adoption / use of cryptocurrencies easier and more widespread? I am curious as to how this money gets spent.
In order to become the de facto home for crypto payment/trading, what does that mean? Does it mean they need to help make the adoption / use of cryptocurrencies easier and more widespread? I am curious as to how this money gets spent.
Also, not sure what their position is on ringfencing deposits, but could also be an in-house credit line for immediate liquidity?
Yep - I'd say they need to push into tech to allow mainstream adoption. Being the backend layer to convert crypto to real funds for businesses or payment processors. Talent, partnerships, probably regulatory issues etc...
Yep - I'd say they need to push into tech to allow mainstream adoption. Being the backend layer to convert crypto to real funds for businesses or payment processors. Talent, partnerships, probably regulatory issues etc...
Why on earth would it become a "home for crypto". The only reason I use them is because Kraken & Co requires full SSN to buy or sell; Coinbase doesn't. There is no network effect here. I don't buy/sell/keep with Coinbase because my friends or family does. The moment I found some other system that doesn't require my full SSN to be revealed, Im moving on as well.
Not sure why so many people downvoted you, this is likely their thought process.
Makes sense, but I don't love how they handled the whole Bitcoin split.
My agreement with this sentiment was stronger before they announced their commitment to accommodate BCC, at least for withdrawal.
I'm of the opposite mindset: why do so many people trust them, with so much money, when they've been so flaky about outages? One 30 minute outage per year would be bad, but they had 3-4 in a two week span, all coinciding with high volume.
Plus, numerous complaints about missing bitcoins. And the potential headache about not honoring BCH balances (which they may be legally sound on).
Plus, numerous complaints about missing bitcoins. And the potential headache about not honoring BCH balances (which they may be legally sound on).
Hopefully to hire support staff
Some think that Coinbase's failure to give their customers the Bitcoin Cash they were entitled to after the fork demonstrated their insolvency.
Maybe now they can spare a human to respond to my 4 attempts to get my account unlocked?
Can anyone who has been investing in digital currency provide some alternatives to Coinbase vis-a-vis fees?
If I am plunking down $65k, then that is almost $1k in fees. In comparison, if I buy stocks, I pay around $7 in commission. I know that it is not a direct comparison cause there is currency conversion fees involved.
Are there any better alternatives? How do you guys invest to avoid fees?
Thanks
If I am plunking down $65k, then that is almost $1k in fees. In comparison, if I buy stocks, I pay around $7 in commission. I know that it is not a direct comparison cause there is currency conversion fees involved.
Are there any better alternatives? How do you guys invest to avoid fees?
Thanks
If you are investing that kind of cash you should be using Coinbase's GDAX exchange not their brokerage service. If you place limit orders on GDAX with the "post only" option checked you will be able to buy coins with zero fees.
Other exchanges have similar fee structures so if you don't want to pay the 1% brokerage fee you really need to learn how to use limit orders regardless of what exchange you ultimately use.
Other exchanges have similar fee structures so if you don't want to pay the 1% brokerage fee you really need to learn how to use limit orders regardless of what exchange you ultimately use.
So I'm late to the digital currency game. What are the regular use cases for digital currency? Who accepts it? Is it mostly for person-to-person trading?
Depends on the currency. Bitcoin is largely just currency, but things like Ethereum introduce concepts such as smart contracts. Here's an article explaining Ethereum, but obviously there are tons of cryptocurrencies now that all work in their own way.
https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/08/10/ultimate-2000...
https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/08/10/ultimate-2000...
Oh, this is super interesting! Thanks!
The utility is that it's a trust-less transfer of value between two parties. Essentially, it's like being able to send cash, anonymously if you chose, to someone else, without an intermediary, in a way that everyone can see and nobody can challenge the legitimacy of.
It seems to me a lot of it is tied up in speculative investment. But there are some vendors who accept it and some countries (eg: Japan) where it's more popular and widely accepted.
It seems to me a lot of it is tied up in speculative investment. But there are some vendors who accept it and some countries (eg: Japan) where it's more popular and widely accepted.
Use cases (Escaping currency controls,Cannot be seized by government, Asset Speculation, Purchasing legal and illegal things, Money laundering, Donating to people like wikileaks)
Bitpay allows you to use bitcoin with a VISA card https://bitpay.com/
Some merchants accept it, Overstock being a famous one.
Bitpay allows you to use bitcoin with a VISA card https://bitpay.com/
Some merchants accept it, Overstock being a famous one.
Many of these things are no different than holding large amounts of normal cash(of any currency really) or something such as gold, with the exception of their being a ledger of all trades that have occurred. Also bitcoins can certainly be seized by the government should they size control over any accounts you hold coins in, take your computers, ect (it's just harder to do so).
Also I think your missing the biggest use case, abet one that isn't frequently discussed, and it is that crypto currencies are by far the best digital payment solution when it comes to the time it takes for transactions to clear. There is no dispute process, and there is no waiting on the fed for their ACA system to clear your transactions. However, I think a lot of people prefer credit cards for cash back and to have the option to charge back, but certainly cryptos are better for sellers (and potentially will give discounts to those who use them in the future).
Also I think your missing the biggest use case, abet one that isn't frequently discussed, and it is that crypto currencies are by far the best digital payment solution when it comes to the time it takes for transactions to clear. There is no dispute process, and there is no waiting on the fed for their ACA system to clear your transactions. However, I think a lot of people prefer credit cards for cash back and to have the option to charge back, but certainly cryptos are better for sellers (and potentially will give discounts to those who use them in the future).
>crypto currencies are by far the best digital payment solution when it comes to the time it takes for transactions to clear
Isn't paypal much faster than crypto currencies at doing the same? The normal banking system is quite slow (in part for good reasons) but the digital currencies that came before the crypto currencies are much better at this already, and better than bitcoin will ever be.
Isn't paypal much faster than crypto currencies at doing the same? The normal banking system is quite slow (in part for good reasons) but the digital currencies that came before the crypto currencies are much better at this already, and better than bitcoin will ever be.
Coinbase uses the term 'digital currency' to -- I believe -- placate NY regulators & to support their regulation moat.
You're correct: if crypto currencies were digital currencies there would be no advantage. However, crypto assets are decentralised & resistant to censorship. The power shifts away from the nation state (& Trump), & toward individuals.
You're correct: if crypto currencies were digital currencies there would be no advantage. However, crypto assets are decentralised & resistant to censorship. The power shifts away from the nation state (& Trump), & toward individuals.
You missed the salient word: "clear"
PayPal transactions never really clear. You can probably reverse a 3 year old PayPal transaction...
But Bitcoin payments are irreversible after only 1 hour. There are no other systems that accomplish that online.
PayPal transactions never really clear. You can probably reverse a 3 year old PayPal transaction...
But Bitcoin payments are irreversible after only 1 hour. There are no other systems that accomplish that online.
If your definition of clearing is that they can't be reversed then nothing that isn't a crypto currency allows it. That's not the usual definition of transaction clearing though.
There are many aspects to bitcoin I just named a few, I'll bet there are others I've forgotten besides the one you mentioned.
Another use case is fungibility, privacy and anonymity. These are features which are for the most part missing in our current financial system.
Monero (https://getmonero.org/) is a good example of a cryptocurrency which focuses on getting these things right.
Monero (https://getmonero.org/) is a good example of a cryptocurrency which focuses on getting these things right.
As a nitpick the proper term is "cryptocurrency", not "digital currency". A cryptocurrency does not necessarily have to be stored or generated digitally.
Makes sense. Coinbase's website is plastered with the term "digital currency" so that seemed the safest to use since I'm not too familiar with that market :)
They do that for their benefit, & for the benefit of their regulator bedfellows (I think). The SEC, for example, dare not mutter the word 'crypto', confirming that Bitcoin et al do actually exist!
> A cryptocurrency does not necessarily have to be stored or generated digitally.
How would a non-digital cryptocurrency work? While signal scramblers, an analog equivalent to digital cryptography, did exist, I have a hard time imagining an analog blockchain.
How would a non-digital cryptocurrency work? While signal scramblers, an analog equivalent to digital cryptography, did exist, I have a hard time imagining an analog blockchain.
a block is just a header, a ref to the previous block, a set of tx's and a nonce to satisfy the work function.
It being digital is just its encoding. An analog cryptocurrency could be carved into trees or anything.
It being digital is just its encoding. An analog cryptocurrency could be carved into trees or anything.
Are you confusing digital with electronic? Ones and zeros carved into a tree are still a digital record. Digital refers to the fact the you operate on a set of discrete values, in contrast to a continuum of values. Medium is irrelevant.
Just to be clear. I do agree with the argument above that "cryptocurrency" is a much more fitting term than "digital currency".
Just to be clear. I do agree with the argument above that "cryptocurrency" is a much more fitting term than "digital currency".
Yeah, I think I am confusing the two.
I suspect there are chemical compounds that when reacted can perform analog arithmetic. If you used that to create signing, hashing and propagation logic I dare say analog cryptocurrencies could exist.
I suspect there are chemical compounds that when reacted can perform analog arithmetic. If you used that to create signing, hashing and propagation logic I dare say analog cryptocurrencies could exist.
[deleted]
There are some vendors who take it; the New Mexico Tea Company for instance—and I buy tea from them because it's good tea, not because they take Bitcoin (I usually use a credit card to check out anyway).
https://www.nmteaco.com
I have also used it to transfer money to friends, because being able to do that in-browser without involving Paypal seemed pretty great. I would like to get my family using it for this reason too, but most of them are not tech savvy enough to handle it (and some probably would have trouble with Coinbase's verification).
https://www.nmteaco.com
I have also used it to transfer money to friends, because being able to do that in-browser without involving Paypal seemed pretty great. I would like to get my family using it for this reason too, but most of them are not tech savvy enough to handle it (and some probably would have trouble with Coinbase's verification).
lots of people have used it to buy drugs
While downvoting this is warranted, this is certainly true. To catch up on the biggest news that has come out of Bitcoin, I'd suggest reading on 'Silk Road' and Ross Ulbricht. Wired has a very good 2-set long form on this[1].
If you don't want such a verbose story, Ars Techica follwed it well too[2]
[1]: https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ https://www.wired.com/2015/05/silk-road-2
[2]: https://arstechnica.com/series/the-silk-road-trial/
If you don't want such a verbose story, Ars Techica follwed it well too[2]
[1]: https://www.wired.com/2015/04/silk-road-1/ https://www.wired.com/2015/05/silk-road-2
[2]: https://arstechnica.com/series/the-silk-road-trial/
That is not the most recent or biggest news, the largest (by a very wide margin) successor to the Silk Road, AlphaBay, was busted just a month ago [1]
[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/07/20/alpha...
[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/07/20/alpha...
By volume, sure, AlphaBay was definitely a bigger successor, but Silk Road was unprecedented. Something like AlphaBay was inevitable after Silk Road (Next was Hansa, but turns out was already a honeypot by that time).
Silk Road was the first to bring forward the notion of how cryptocurrencies can be used for something much more malicious than coffee. The news it made, and with a face to the organization made it a bigger story, and with Federal Officers involved in a related crime, I will maintain it is a much more important story than AlphaBay.
On a sidenote, AlphaBay isn't the all secure operation you think it was, the 'admin' used a clearnet personal email address for some sort of welcome message, and several other stupid mistakes (check out the document posted a couple days ago in detail and a link to a forum in the comments).
There will be another market which will be bigger than AlphaBay. Currencies with more privacy oriented features are coming baked in, so it will be harder to catch them too.
Silk Road was the first to bring forward the notion of how cryptocurrencies can be used for something much more malicious than coffee. The news it made, and with a face to the organization made it a bigger story, and with Federal Officers involved in a related crime, I will maintain it is a much more important story than AlphaBay.
On a sidenote, AlphaBay isn't the all secure operation you think it was, the 'admin' used a clearnet personal email address for some sort of welcome message, and several other stupid mistakes (check out the document posted a couple days ago in detail and a link to a forum in the comments).
There will be another market which will be bigger than AlphaBay. Currencies with more privacy oriented features are coming baked in, so it will be harder to catch them too.
> isn't the all secure operation you think it was
I did not say that at all. Though since you brought it up, the FBI and Dutch Police's explanation for how they busted the site is very suspect. It does not sound legitimate at all, it's much more likely they cracked the site in another (more illegal/unethical) way and used parallel construction to hide what they did.
I did not say that at all. Though since you brought it up, the FBI and Dutch Police's explanation for how they busted the site is very suspect. It does not sound legitimate at all, it's much more likely they cracked the site in another (more illegal/unethical) way and used parallel construction to hide what they did.
>>> isn't the all secure operation you think it was
>I did not say that at all.
You didn't, but I said that to show that it didn't earn it's place as the bigger competitor, it was just bound to happen no matter who braved it.
>Though since you brought it up, the FBI and Dutch Police's explanation for how they busted the site is very suspect. It does not sound legitimate at all, it's much more likely they cracked the site in another (more illegal/unethical) way and used parallel construction to hide what they did.
Mostly agree. But I don't think there's anything illegal about cracking the tor network, AlphaBay's servers or one of its admins' computers. There was probably a warrant for whatever they did, especially since it was at the international level involving multiple agencies. It might also be a vulnerability in the tor network, but I bet we would most likely never know.
>I did not say that at all.
You didn't, but I said that to show that it didn't earn it's place as the bigger competitor, it was just bound to happen no matter who braved it.
>Though since you brought it up, the FBI and Dutch Police's explanation for how they busted the site is very suspect. It does not sound legitimate at all, it's much more likely they cracked the site in another (more illegal/unethical) way and used parallel construction to hide what they did.
Mostly agree. But I don't think there's anything illegal about cracking the tor network, AlphaBay's servers or one of its admins' computers. There was probably a warrant for whatever they did, especially since it was at the international level involving multiple agencies. It might also be a vulnerability in the tor network, but I bet we would most likely never know.
> So I'm late to the digital currency game
Many of us haven't even started !
Many of us haven't even started !
You're quite early even by talking about it
it's all being sorted out rn, thus the gold rush
It's 'crypto currency'. It's not centralised M-Pesa (African digital currency created by Vodafone), or PayPal.
If you don't understand what it is, you may buy the wrong crypto asset. I think it's fair to say it's a good idea to know what you're investing in!
If you don't understand what it is, you may buy the wrong crypto asset. I think it's fair to say it's a good idea to know what you're investing in!
Unrelated, but it still blows my mind- that the creator of this cryptosystem thats now worth $50B is still unknown.
He has to have been lived somewhere, gone to school somewhere, studied, worked somewhere, left some track somewhere about who he was.
He has to have been lived somewhere, gone to school somewhere, studied, worked somewhere, left some track somewhere about who he was.
Dave Kleiman - Look him up. It's actually all a kind of sad and sordid story. The myth is far better than the reality.
I think that story was largely debunked. It even turned into a dicey situation for gwern, though I respect his commitment to chasing down a lead.
Can anyone recommend a decent exchange that supports deposits and withdrawals from a UK GBP bank account without needing to do a SEPA or SWIFT transfer?
Neither Kraken nor Bitstamp do :(
Neither Kraken nor Bitstamp do :(
I can't find one either. I've decided the best option is depositing/withdrawing using localbitcoins.com, then transferring in/out of there to your preferred platforms.
Yeah, it's infuriating. I'm hoping Revolut enables bitcoin on their platform soon. Until then, will check out localbitcoins.com, thanks.
Seems like a no-brainer for IVP. It seems like coinbase is exceptionally well positioned to harvest a big chuck of the institutional money that's about to hit crypto.
Does this means they'll be arsed to reply to customer support queries more rapidly in future? Say a 1-2 month turnaround instead of 2-4?
With this trading frenzy on gdax and on coinbase itself, why do they need round D? They are charging hefty fees on coinbase, and some fees on gdax too. It's "pure play" , there's no fixed real world expenses
It's nice to see that, until this comment, CTRL-F yields nothing for "ponzi" or "scam." "pyramid scheme" and "drugs" are still making appearances, though.
[deleted]
So that's why they refunded everyone after they got taken advantage of in the flash crash.
Maintaining confidence had greater consequences than not.
All about those user numbers, or attracting other people attempting to exploit the same glitch. Pretty efficient market in that regard.
Maintaining confidence had greater consequences than not.
All about those user numbers, or attracting other people attempting to exploit the same glitch. Pretty efficient market in that regard.
Why not do a Coinbase tier2 not-stock-but-we'll-pretend-it's-stock ICO?
Could raise even more money with zero actual equity dilution.
Could raise even more money with zero actual equity dilution.
Edit - Moved to comment I was trying to address -
> Crypto could become the "people's" wealth vault, and undercut nations ability to tax & control markets by truly privatizing wealth. All it takes is MOST of us to decide.
You say that like its an admirable goal we should strive for. Taxes built the roads and bridges you drive on, the crystal-clean water that flows from your tap, the lines that your internet runs over, and the (admittedly glacial) bureaucracy that prevents your city, municipality, province and country from descending into unorganised chaos.
You say that like its an admirable goal we should strive for. Taxes built the roads and bridges you drive on, the crystal-clean water that flows from your tap, the lines that your internet runs over, and the (admittedly glacial) bureaucracy that prevents your city, municipality, province and country from descending into unorganised chaos.
Roads, bridges and schools were built before national governments began passively levying taxes on income. this is a 100 year old concept.
Taxes on capital gains are a 70 year old concept.
Just recognize the amorality of it. It can only be billed as a "duty" for "roads and schools" when pandering to the lower classes who have no choice in the matter, while recognizing those classes have the numbers to get you in office. But "taxes" are not an absolute on the concept of how a government can fund itself. Governments have to balance the consequences of how they attempt to raise revenues, by being competitive amongst other countries, as their ecosystems primarily rely on attracting or incentivizing investment.
Taxes on capital gains are a 70 year old concept.
Just recognize the amorality of it. It can only be billed as a "duty" for "roads and schools" when pandering to the lower classes who have no choice in the matter, while recognizing those classes have the numbers to get you in office. But "taxes" are not an absolute on the concept of how a government can fund itself. Governments have to balance the consequences of how they attempt to raise revenues, by being competitive amongst other countries, as their ecosystems primarily rely on attracting or incentivizing investment.
Just because tax enable those things in the United States right now does not imply that is the only way they could be provided
I am illustrating use cases, not advocating.
The minute you realize the use case around privatization of global wealth you can begin to underwrite its probability.
Because the crypto platform provides the OPTION for that to happen at scale.
And crypto gives people globally the opportunity to make the decision and vote with their personal wealth (and mining power).
The minute you realize the use case around privatization of global wealth you can begin to underwrite its probability.
Because the crypto platform provides the OPTION for that to happen at scale.
And crypto gives people globally the opportunity to make the decision and vote with their personal wealth (and mining power).
Your currency use cases sound fine to me. The wealth ones however look dangerous to me.
>Crypto could be the biggest store of value. The beautiful math behind bitcoin (and others) is self-limiting creating real scarcity. With mass adoption will come stability.
Currencies should never be used to store value. No one should hold large amounts of wealth in Euros or Dollars and almost no one does. You hold wealth in actual productive assets like land, stocks, bonds, etc. That we price these in Euros or Dollars is irrelevant and we can price them in Bitcoin just as well. Nothing the central banks that control fiat currencies do changes the underlying worth of these assets even if they can generate temporary valuation swings.
>Crypto could become the "people's" wealth vault, and undercut nations ability to tax & control markets by truly privatizing wealth. All it takes is MOST of us to decide.
This to me sounds even riskier. People shouldn't be going out and buying bitcoin to do any of this when there are plentiful cheap instruments out there to actually invest in assets. Go buy ETFs of broadly diversified asset classes (stocks and bonds would suffice but real estate ones also exist) and leave the innovation in crypto currencies to sort itself out.
>Crypto could be the biggest store of value. The beautiful math behind bitcoin (and others) is self-limiting creating real scarcity. With mass adoption will come stability.
Currencies should never be used to store value. No one should hold large amounts of wealth in Euros or Dollars and almost no one does. You hold wealth in actual productive assets like land, stocks, bonds, etc. That we price these in Euros or Dollars is irrelevant and we can price them in Bitcoin just as well. Nothing the central banks that control fiat currencies do changes the underlying worth of these assets even if they can generate temporary valuation swings.
>Crypto could become the "people's" wealth vault, and undercut nations ability to tax & control markets by truly privatizing wealth. All it takes is MOST of us to decide.
This to me sounds even riskier. People shouldn't be going out and buying bitcoin to do any of this when there are plentiful cheap instruments out there to actually invest in assets. Go buy ETFs of broadly diversified asset classes (stocks and bonds would suffice but real estate ones also exist) and leave the innovation in crypto currencies to sort itself out.
They have been doing this since 2012 when Bitcoin was essentially free...I guess they took the money just in case.
Great news! I'm very bullish on digital currencies.
*Crypto currencies.
Without cryptography, we may fall into 1984 -- or something like that. Cryptography grants us privacy.
Without cryptography, we may fall into 1984 -- or something like that. Cryptography grants us privacy.
That money would have had better upside if invested in bitcoin directly.
Are you saying that the investors would get a better return on their investment if they had instead simply purchased bitcoins?
That claim seems to require the ability to know the future. Bitcoin may eventually be superseded by a superior alt coin, and disappear into history.
That claim seems to require the ability to know the future. Bitcoin may eventually be superseded by a superior alt coin, and disappear into history.
> That claim seems to require the ability to know the future.
One could say startup investing does too.
One could say startup investing does too.
I believe during a gold rush the people who consistently come out ahead are those selling shovels.
the analogy doesn't really hold to coinbase though. Shovels are a utility for mining gold. That would correlate to GPUs and other computer hardware. In that regard perhaps the VCs should be investing in AMD or Nvidia.
I imagine if you are a VC investing in this space, hedging between hardware, currencies, and exchanges/merchant services would probably be smart. If the market cap of BTC drops, does the market value of e.g. Intel or Coinbase drop proportionally?
Yeesh, now I'm getting worried that if everyone just puts all of their money into speculation instead of investment its going to be really bad for the economy in the long run...
How in the bloody hell does Coinbase not fund its own operations with profit??? I figured they made over a $100m every quarter.
Do we have any source on what is their revenue? I sincerely doubt they are making 100 million in profit every quarter. I would be surprised if they were actually profitable.
With the fees they charge, and the volume on the exchange, I don't see how they couldn't be making a profit? Of course I'm not a business guy, might be something I'm not thinking of.
If they were making profit, I'd assume they would make a press release. They would want the business world know.
Privately owned profitable businesses don't usually go trumpeting to the world how wildly profitable they are. That is just inviting competition. Kind of dumb.
No. If they're making a killing and released it to the public, there would be a clamor for lower fees.
[deleted]
I would guess (hope) they have a ton of fiat in reserve that they don't want to touch.
TigerShark5(5)
I don't think coinbase are going to add Monero. It's too much like cypherpunk money.
lots of people have used it to buy drugs
lots of people have used cash to buy drugs...
UndeadAuraS(1)
As a someone looking make purchases with BTC; if the value of a BTC is going up, why would I use it to buy anything? It's gone up $700 in the last week; up $200 in the last 24 hours alone. I'd feel incredible silly spending bitcoin in a growth phase.
As someone looking to accept BTC for purchases, how do I do so with confidence that when I accepted $3400 today that by the time I cash out it's not worth $2700?
My confusion really comes from the buying/selling of legal goods; I can see the risk being worth it if you're operating outside the law. But really; if I'm selling something then there's a pretty good chance I'm buying my supplies with a fiat currency. I have hard and set costs I need to cover. If I accept BTC, there's a chance that when it's all said and done the BTC isn't worth what I paid and now I'm losing money.
Are businesses just expected to accept that risk? If so, how many businesses are actually willing to accept that risk? Or do we have to wait for the price to settle down before seeing more widespread adoption?