[sgornick]

You mean less interested in using it as a way to profit from speculation. As a currency it is not as critical that the value only goes up.

A person or merchant receiving bitcoins can easily convert them out to USDs and still lose less in fees than the same transaction would cost compared to accepting a credit card or debit card payment. For example, BTC -> USD at most exchanges is around half a percent.

[KaeseEs]

Well, no. Currencies as we know them are not only for exchange, but also are supposed to be reasonable stores of value. If a currency loses 85% of its worth in a period of weeks, it has failed at this fundamental task.

Now, for merchants this might not seem to matter, as they might be able to always convert bitcoins to a real currency immediately and never hold them long enough for depreciation to matter, but if the currency is excessively volatile there will never be a buyer at the exchange besides speculators, which prevents the currency from ever being really useful.

[georgemcbay]

"As a currency it is not as critical that the value only goes up."

True, but to be a practical currency it is critical that the value remains relatively stable. A currency capable of dropping from $1000 USD to $150 USD in a very short time is clearly not stable.

[codexon]

This is unfortunately untrue. Bitcoin has been subject to huge 30% swings in a matter of minutes.

[Symmetry]

It sounds like Bitcoin is doing much better in the "Medium of Exchange" side of the money coin than the "Store of Value" side.

[wmf]

Which is not saying much, because if you try to avoid volatility by doing a USD->BTC->USD transaction you get hit with fees that are almost as much as credit cards, not to mention the complexity.

[rsynnott]

> As a currency it is not as critical that the value only goes up.

Not just not critical, highly undesirable.