[mutteraloo]

It could also go back to $100.

Bitcoin has no mainstream use right now. It's too expensive to transact in terms of money and time, it's too volatile to be a store of value, it's too technical to be used casually, it's too fragile since it gets hacked every which way, and it's too easily copied to be rare.

[tom_mellior]

> it's too technical to be used casually

In casual use with your mobile phone, you are shown a QR code, scan it, tap "OK", and it's done. Not that technical. Billions of people with smartphones could handle that perfectly. You're right about transactions being slow and expensive, and that is certainly a much bigger problem. That and the fact that there are still very few places accepting it.

[lucaspiller]

> That and the fact that there are still very few places accepting it.

This is one thing I don’t get. In countries like China and India (to name the two countries I know about) mobile payment apps are ubiquitous. You go in to a shop, scan a QR code, and boom your payment is done. This is what crytocurrencies promised, but instead more closed apps came to fill the market. What happened?

[zenlikethat]

I doubt it's about the government like another poster mentioned. Cash works great to subvert the government and that's exactly what a lot of little shops do. It's probably because as a merchant:

1. You don't want to _ever_ wait 45 minutes for a transaction to potentially be confirmed on the blockchain. Even before the recent craziness and high fees this would sometimes happen.

2. The price fluctuates wildly. Pretty hard to reason properly about whether or not you'll be able to pay your employees this week if your "store of value" could drop 20% or more at a moment's notice.

3. The fees charged by exchanges to convert to fiat are exorbitant. Unless all of your suppliers and handymen take Bitcoin, you will get screwed by this on the regular.

The bulls usually scream "Lightning network, scaling, store of value" or some other nonsense, but the truth is, today Bitcoin is garbage as an actual currency.

[stubish]

They take zero effort to setup, since it just adds to your existing phone bill. Unlike bitcoin, where people need to install apps, navigate subscribing to financial-like systems they don't really understand. The conversion rate will be tiny, and very few people who consider paying with Bitcoin will complete the process and actually be in a position to scan the QR code and hit the button. None of the other crypto currencies are even on the public's radar, and won't be unless Visa or Mastercard join in.

[CryptoPunk]

>>What happened?

Bitcoin Core betrayed the original vision of Bitcoin and hotwired it into a high-cost settlement system. The average transaction fee in Bitcoin is something like $38, which is more than the average weekly salary in many countries.

I believe that cryptocurrency will eventually attain mass adoption. The timeline has been pushed back a few years though because the main network has failed.

[eastendguy]

All these apps give the government more control, that is why their use is encouraged.

Bitcoin "as app" (once or if it works) will be more like cash payments, privacy wise. That is were I see the main advantage. I find it spooky what Visa and Mastercard now about all of us... at least about me.

[bootlooped]

> Bitcoin "as app" (once or if it works) will be more like cash payments, privacy wise.

One massive caveat is that all Bitcoin transactions are public, traceable, and permanently stored in the Bitcoin network. In most ways it's worse than cash, in some ways it's probably even worse than credit cards.

[cryptodogemoon]

zk proofs supposedly resolve that issue.

monereo, zcash, and eventually ethereum

the concept seems to make sense but I'd be curious how to audit such an obfuscated system

[Fnoord]

s/monereo/Monero/

[robryan]

At the current volatility how can businesses be expected to take on the risk of accepting bitcoin? None of their costs would be in bitcoin so they would have to be constantly moving their bitcoin to fiat currency and taking a risk on wild daily swings.

[tom_mellior]

Businesses accepting Bitcoin typically do it via third-party payment processors. The intermediate takes a cut, shields the vendor from the risks, and pays an agreed price in fiat.

The system has been in place for years, and it works reasonably well. More competition would still help. And yes, a better network and better systems to cut out the intermediary would help even more.

[StavrosK]

The problem with that now, and the reason why Steam stopped accepting Bitcoin, is that the peg expires by the time the transaction comes in, which can take hours.

[tomcooks]

Bitcoin never got hacked, unsecure middlemen did (or pretended to have been)

[dumbfounder]

To most people there is no difference. The consequence is that Bitcoin seems unsafe because there has been lots of money stolen. It's like the Oracle bug I am tackling today, my customers don't care if it's Oracle's fault, they just know my product doesn't work.

[ransom1538]

My entire wallet was stolen [i] -- all that hard work. But that is great news Bitcoin never got hacked -- I got nervous there. /sarcasm

http://www.cryptsysettlement.com/ [i]

[snissn]

I'm sorry you lost funds but there is a finer point separating the bitcoin network and the bitcoin protocol and an exchange losing their funds.

[slphil]

Yes, this is not a Bitcoin vulnerability. Getting access to your wallet is not the same as cracking it.

[slphil]

Don't understand why I'm being downvoted. Don't put your coins on an exchange, ever, unless you want to risk them being lost. This is cryptocurrency 101.

[bfuller]

Cryptsy was a middleman, he specifically covered this case. Bitcoin never got hacked.

[Snackchez]

>Being hacked every which way

Do you want to clarify this? If you meant what I think you meant, you're incorrect.

[0wing]

Numerous cases of backdoored wallets, or poorly implemented weak private keys generated from javascript, or straight up theft from deposits.

While a tiny aspect of dealing with Bitcoin is secure (key pairs) [1], actually using Bitcoin has proven to be a mess for almost the majority of users.

This is not a user friendly experience for most users.

[1] https://lbc.cryptoguru.org/about

[philipwhiuk]

Not the ledger, the exchanges. And then it's impossible to recover the money because the account it's gone to is anonymous.

[s0rce]

I assume he meant people have had their coins stolen, usually from exchanges, really not much different than your bank getting robbed, although in this cause your money is gone and the exchange doesn't cover the theft.

[jandrese]

There is no FDIC for Bitcoin exchanges. Also a distressingly large percentage of the exchanges to date have been either fraudulently or incompetently run and lost the user's bitcoibs and/or fiat money.

Nobody would use banks if 4 out of 5 were completely cleaned out by crooks and went out of business.

[solotronics]

yes there is. Gemini is FDIC insured for dollar deposits https://gemini24.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/205823016-Are...

[ryguytilidie]

I'd say that goes beyond "really not that much different".

[coralreef]

People always forget to include future innovations in their projections. It's as if they don't believe (or know) that software can rapidly improve.

The lightning network looks very promising in its ability to scale and reduce fees. It would make transactions nearly instantaneous, have reasonable fees, and help scale the network.

[geezerjay]

> People always forget to include future innovations in their projections. It's as if they don't believe (or know) that software can rapidly improve.

And you posted that comment while driving your flying car on your way to alpha centauri, right?

Foolosh cargo cult beliefs such as the ones you've illustrated do not serve as any basis to make investment decisions.

[coralreef]

Everyone thought Netflix was a useless mail-order DVD company until it dominated streaming video.

Everyone thought Amazon would never make a profit until it revealed the profit monster that is AWS.

No one can predict the future, all you can do is take the information you have available today and come to your own conclusion. If you don't understand the implications of cryptocurrency on society and money, then that's your loss. If you think you do understand it and believe otherwise, then go ahead and short everything and go make some profits against it.

[cglace]

Everyone did not think either of those things. In fact most people saw a lot of value in both companies and used/invested heavily in both.

I've followed bitcoin from the beginning and personally think the only problem it seems to solve is a way for techies to get rich quick.

[zenlikethat]

If "everyone" though Netflix was "useless", then its win came out of the blue. Meanwhile you're trying to argue that the current hype around Bitcoin is justified because of something that _might_ happen in the future. There were a lot of massively over-hyped Internet companies too. They _could_ have developed technology and a big business. But the opposite happened - they went bankrupt.

[coralreef]

I'm sure some very smart people saw a path to internet streaming distribution and negotiation leverage with their content base.

I don't know if the hype/price is justified, I just know cryptocurrencies are going to change the world. It seems to me that something that important is probably worth betting on, and not against.

[TheDong]

Help scale "the" network?

No, it would help scale "the lightning network" which would not be the same as "the bitcoin network".

[coralreef]

Pushing transactions into sidechains helps free the main network from congestion.

So while it may not be technically true that the main network's capabilities have changed, users should see massive improvements.

[daveguy]

When no one uses bitcoin anymore there will no longer be any congestion. Solid.

[o_____________o]

What is it about bitcoin conversations that turn HN into a Reddit-esque sarcasm pit? We can debate difficult topics with civility.

[naveen99]

> it could also go back to $100

Do some napkin math, this is impossible. The people who hold bitcoin now probably have a combined net worth of over a trillion dollars. They will pump and dump it forever rather than let it go to zero. It's way too much fun to trade alone.

> bitcoin has no mainstream use right now

Maybe not in india yet. Even there, it's only a matter of time. Someone will introduce gbtc to the NSE and BSE, and watch it get bought widely even in india. There is a reason it sells at a 20% premium in india.

[kbwt]

> this is impossible.

I wouldn't be so sure.

> pump and dump it forever

That doesn't work.

[andrepd]

>it's too easily copied to be rare

What do you mean by this?

[josu]

And yet it moves

[hyprCoin]

Bitcoin's value prop is a store of wealth and it's an entryway (through exchanges) to far more interesting coins.

Crypto is also a stock market 2.0, where bitcoin is an index fund.

[vasilipupkin]

Noooooooooo. Bitcoin is not the stock market. It's more like a commodity

[hyprCoin]

Being able to exchange btc for other coins makes it like a stock market. BTC is also a commodity. It is also a speculative investment into the lightning network. It is also a hedge against fiat currency.

BTC is many things and it causes confusion amongst people trying to determine where the value comes from. It took me many years to figure this out, unfortunately.

[mrb]

«too expensive to transact»

Proved wrong by 300k transactions per day willing to pay a median fee of $30+.

«too volatile to be a store of value»

Proved wrong on the long term; has shown to be a fantastic store of value over 7 years: http://bitcoin.zorinaq.com/price/

«too technical»

Only gets easier over time.

«too fragile since it gets hacked »

Hardware wallets have pretty much solved hacking (plus can be backed up on paper in case they are lost, etc)