Somehow, I suspect more people have had Bitcoin keys stolen by malware than have had their armored cars robbed.

This is precisely what I don't get about cryptocurrencies. There is no intrinsic value, and they're not even backed by the full faith and credit of, well, anyone. I don't see why it's "worth" anything.

And, we don't need a digital currency. We already have a bunch of them (the US dollar among them). Most money in the world doesn't exist as physical coins, notes, gold/silver, etc. It's all bits in a computer, but those bits are backed by a sovereign entity. That's why we are able to use them as currency.

If anyone can explain the fundamentals of why BTC or any other cryptocurrency should have any value whatsoever, I would really appreciate that.

> And, we don't need a digital currency. We already have a bunch of them [...]

That's a bit enraging to me. I feel it's in the same class of arguments with things like earth is flat -- we don't want a round one, blacks are not humans -- they should be happy we grant them slavery. The status quo is our normality.

> backed by a sovereign entity

Which one? I had savings to buy several apartments but in a few years those savings were worth a lunch. That was a long time ago. But as of now my income depends on US, EU, Syria, Turkey etc crisis and hell knows what other stuff I don't even hear about on the news.

As a guy lacking both bitcoins and real money they both weight as a surprisingly similar amount of crap.

I've always felt this argument is disingenuous. People traded goods and services prior to government-backed currency. Being backed by a government sure does simplify things and make more people value it but it isn't necessary. Government-backed money can turn into Monopoly money as well.

Lest you forget 1920's Germany [0].

[0] http://i.imgur.com/nk0CnNr.png

The part that makes BTC relatively safe to transact with is the blockchain itself.

I agree though that for payments where the merchant can't be banked or VISA doesn't want to support them, Bitcoin or cash are the only other options.

Bitcoin confirmations are just that, confirmations of transaction being approved by the network.

-blockchain is immutable -only gets written if valid -takes 10~60min to be confident of the reality -no chargebacks

Once every 200 transactions let's say, my card will be denied and I'll need to swipe it a second time. This is significantly less of an ordeal than having to rely on the inefficiency of the blockchain every single transaction.

Just like credit cards will exist alongside cryptocurrency. There already exists merchant processors like BitPay that allow for 0-conf transactions. I'm not saying that's ideal or the permanent solution, but because bitcoin/crypto is software, it will continue to be improved upon over time.

Did you know that VISA has been able to process up to 56,000 transactions per second in 2014? It also sounds like they improved 20% from 2013 to 2014 [1]

If the past 8 years are of any indication, bitcoin is more like physical mail than VISA is in your analogy, in terms of performance, ease of use, and how fast it is improving.

[1] http://www.digitaltransactions.net/news/story/Visa_s-Test-Re...

I regularly spend more time than that on VISA transactions because I don't live at my billing address on another continent.

Why are you only considering signing time? Signing a bitcoin transaction is not sufficient for the merchant to be confident that they can give you your goods. You must submit it to the network and the merchant must be reasonably confident that it will be accepted in a block as-is and that the block will not be orphaned.

But yeah, obviously as the transaction value goes up the merchant will need to wait a few more seconds to counter doublespend attacks.

>You must submit it to the network

Not necessarily true, ideally the customer doesn't need internet connection and just transmits the signed transaction to the PoS.

>and the merchant must be reasonably confident that it will be accepted in a block as-is and that the block will not be orphaned

First of which can be verified very fast by a computer. I believe orphaned blocks are rare enough that they're mostly a non-issue.

I guess it's important to point out that in practice most Bitcoin ATMs I've used did 0-confirmation transactions up to 1000 euros after only a few second wait, so it's not like all bitcoin merchants suck.

After that it's only about checking if the fee is high enough.

Which can take up to 72 hours, right?

A Bitcoin transation is not a credit facility. This is an important differentiation.

When you pay with a credit/debit card, the money isn't transferred right away.

Visa/MC check to see if they are willing to approve the transaction(see if you've breeched your limit)

if they are, they guarentee that you are good for the money, and the merchant approves the transaction.

A few days later, visa will settle with the merchant, paying your debt on your behalf.

You then pay visa on your monthly schedual.

Visa also act as an escrow of sorts, If there is fraud, or the transaction becomes void, Visa is equally liable to sort it (depending on country).

Bitcoin has none of these functions, it is just digital cash, with a public ledger. Whats worse is you need a credit function to allow quick purchasing of thing with bitcoin, because of the time needed for verification.

Without a relable and safe credit/escrow system digital currencies will just be limited to the brave or those who have a decent cradit facility.

From the user's perspective, not really. Many people compare their credit card to Bitcoin even if the way these systems work are completely different (credit network atop fiat versus digital asset, as you say).

At the end of the day, all that matters is how fast, secure and reliable these things are to the user. If they can pay for their loaf of bread within 5 seconds and easily pay off their credit card once a month, and the Bitcoin alternative is using a crypto-exchange, exposing yourself to volatility risk, all for something that is slower and less reliable at the point-of-sale... Bitcoin is far behind.

Sure, if we had a credit system on top of Bitcoin, it would probably have an easier time competing with VISA credit cards, but the fact is that does not exist so cannot easily be compared today.

My US credit cards work well in most of the world if I want to buy from some kinds of business (ex. use a chip card to pay for gas, hotel, groceries, restaurant meals, etc. in Canada.)

If I want to send money to a bank account elsewhere in the world my credit union charges about $40, and most other banks charge about the same. This is not so bad if you need to move $100,000 but the fee is too much to move $100.

Bitcoin is not as fast as swiping a credit time but bitcoin and a wire transfer are on the same scale, and even if you pay a $5 miner's fee on a transaction that beats the wire transfer.

[1] https://medium.com/cryptonight/bitcoin-doesn-t-make-remittan...

[2] https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/rebittance-startups-agr...

[3] https://www.saveonsend.com/blog/bitcoin-money-transfer/

Electronic "money" in general has long been available through credit cards, PayPal, etc but at higher cost and loss of anonymity

1) has assured/immutable transactions (unlike CCs) - This may or may not be a good thing from a purchaser perspective on seller fraud.

2) is available to all individuals (unlike banks) - Again, which may or may not be a good thing if you're worried about money from/to the grey/black market.