[fat0wl]

yeah the fact that the Bitcoin scam is spreading raises eyebrows. Companies want to accept it to sound futuristic but they should really be shutting it down.

Notice how none of the tech-giants want to get involved with it. Bitcoin isn't for the technologically advanced who are "being rewarded for being sooooo smart and adopting early", it's a scammer platform.

I heard a suggestion for a gold-backed digital currency once. That makes much more sense to me. Instead of getting into magic bean territory with monstrous gains/losses, just put 100k into gold, design a system with 100k "eGoldcoin" or whatever u wanna call it then just trade the coins. The platform would never tank because people know roughly what it's worth. It would be way less exciting, well... because it's sane.

[gst]

> The platform would never tank because people know roughly what it's worth.

So what exactly is the worth of one ounce of gold? The current market price? Or another price? What's the difference to Bitcoin in regards to pricing?

[fat0wl]

Eh I'll be honest I'm not sure exactly how the gold standard works but I'm pretty sure it's priced individually against many currencies, whereas Bitcoin's whole pricing system is fantastical.

I'm pretty sure Bitcoin just takes it's sticker price (whatever it's currently been bid upto) and then does a bunch of arbitrary currency conversions.

Again, I THINK this, do not know... but i THINK if you took the amount of gold and multiplied by its USD price to arrive at some figure of how much the "gold pool" is worth (bitcoiners do this all the time) gold traders would laugh their asses off at you. The medium needs to be tightly interwoven into individual economies through usage and growth/settling.

Bitcoin is like this thing that is sitting out in the ether totally untested and people are making random claims about how much its worth, supported only by bidding wars in trading.

[mrb]

"I'm pretty sure it's priced individually against many currencies"

No, it is not "priced". Nobody sets an "official price" for gold. Every actor in the market who sells and buys gold is free to set his own price, via "asks" and "bids" in the market. This is what gst highlighted for you: Bitcoin functions exactly like gold, their value fluctuates freely on international and national markets via trading, and nothing else.

"if you took the amount of gold and multiplied by its USD price to arrive at some figure of how much the "gold pool" is worth gold traders would laugh their asses off at you"

Actually, no. Analysts do this all the time. Google for "gold reserves". Here is the latest data from the World Bank: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FI.RES.TOTL.CD

[fat0wl]

What I meant by priced individually isn't that a price is "set" I meant people buy & sell gold in a number of currencies, such that each has an exchange rate that isn't interpreted by conversion to a fiat currency then checking the exchange rate for that.

I don't know too much about gold though so I'll let the convo go. To be honest I think CreditCards are where it's at & the small fees involved are to provide consumer protection so I don't mind.

If Bitcoin reaches a comparable infrastructure I'm sure they'll be charging fees for everything too (the exchange services already do, no?).

[mrb]

"such that each has an exchange rate that isn't interpreted by conversion to a fiat currency then checking the exchange rate for that"

Actually, it is interpreted by comparing gold's price with exchange rates. When gold is, say, underpriced in yen on chinese markets when compared to its price in US dollar on american markets, this creates a condition where "arbitrage" is possible. So people who see this buy it up on the chinese market and resell it on the american market, making a profit. This naturally re-aligns the price of gold in various markets with exchange rates. The exact same thing is done by Bitcoin traders, and forex traders, and commodities traders, etc.

[fat0wl]

eh it's hard for me to keep going with this argument because Bitcoin's pricing is so made up, but i'll try.

I wasn't saying gold doesn't have an exchange rate. I was saying it DOES have one for EACH currency (allowing this arbitrage scenario) and that's part of what makes it strong. My impression of Bitcoin was that they simply price it in Yen or USD or whatever is their best market, then convert from THAT currency into whatever other currencies they want through the real-world exchange rates of existing currencies, in order to display it with a unified favorable price.

However, these arguments aren't even worth it really since the price is so varied from exchange to exchange that let's face it -- the numbers are pretty much all distorted BS regardless of how the prices are determined. All they represent is real-time bids. It's like watching a big eBay auction on nothing and claiming the true value of the item is evidenced by the current bid.

[bencoder]

What about counterparty risk? With eGoldCoin, you have to trust the issuer to actually have the gold that's backing the coins in circulation, and to never make any more than 100k eGoldCoin.

Bitcoin may not be backed by anything, but the fact that it can't be counterfeited or inflated gives it very interesting properties.

[gabemart]

In case you haven't heard of it before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-gold

[nullc]

> I heard a suggestion for a gold-backed digital currency once.

Yep, and now go look up how that went.

It's not possible to "gold back" a digital currency without centralization which carries a multitude of risk, as has been demonstrated by the many failures along the way.

[drewblaisdell]

> Notice how none of the tech-giants want to get involved with it.

Chamath Palihapitiya, Kevin Rose, the Winklevii

[fat0wl]

missing from that list -- Google, Yahoo, Amazon... actual retailers with products

I don't care what VC hipsters are doing, and who the hell were the Winklevii before they started hyping bitcoin?

[drewblaisdell]

Google invested in Buttercoin (buttercoin.com).

You don't understand the virtual currency space. There are many good arguments against virtual currencies or bitcoin specifically, but the lack of Silicon Valley interest is absolutely not one of them.

[fat0wl]

It's not that I am against virtual currency and think there is no interest in it -- I just think the Bitcoin scheme is so f__ked that respected corps don't wanna be involved.

I'm not surprised at all that Google invested in an alternative. In fact, maybe that will catalyze Bitcoin's demise.

[iand]

You are mistaken if you think it's an alternative. From their site: "Buttercoin is a free, white-label bitcoin exchange"

[fat0wl]

eh true i didn't click the link i assumed from the name since there are so many wannabes showing up.

But again, it doesn't look like Google is accepting Bitcoin in exchange for their services. They just invested in a company that is going to try to make cash skimming transaction fees off the ecosystem and probably converting to USD.

[drewblaisdell]

I think he is either a troll or has an axe to grind about this issue for some unmentioned reason.

[SyneRyder]

You might have missed the news that Baidu (basically China's equivalent of Google) have started accepting Bitcoin as payment for their services. It's unlikely that Baidu is able to do that without approval (or at least guidance) from the Chinese Government. That's partly what has sent Bitcoin soaring, the theory that China views Bitcoin as a viable alternative currency to USD, and they want to dominate it before other countries do.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/11/18/investing/bitcoin-china/

[fat0wl]

This is interesting but where you go off the rails is with the word "dominate". If it's a currency and very easily divisible (move some decimal places) why would one need to dominate it?

You Bitcoiners claim to be more than just a mound of greedy speculators yet you view everything as a hoarder/trading scenario.

[VMG]

> I heard a suggestion for a gold-backed digital currency once.

I think you fell for a joke.

[fat0wl]

Think about it man, if the Bitcoin delusion ends it is worth nothing.

In a gold-backed online currency if it failed the users could just be beneficiaries of the trust. I'm not saying this is the ideal solution because I think maybe a completely fiat digital currency COULD work, just not with the Bitcoin scheme.

And I'm not saying Bitcoin can't work in the long-run. I'm saying it's not working NOW. It is not performing its intended function... unless that intended function is as a volatile speculator market.

[VMG]

You don't understand the point of Bitcoin. There can't be a decentralized digital currency that is backed by real-world assets. Who guarantees that you're Egoldcoin is worth an ounce of gold?

[fat0wl]

Eh I shouldn't have even bothered with this argument because look... I wouldn't give a s__t about "eGold" either.

(Credit Cards || Google Wallet) > All this junk

The only reason I bothered with the gold argument is because Bitcoin's volatility is its downfall. If it were pegged to a real-world asset this would essentially be solved. But credit cards already do this -- they are pegged to bank accounts.