[/thread]. That's really what it is, but instead of casino, call it a stock market. With that one there's a lot of regulation in place - including new European legislation, MiFID II (http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-305_en.htm), which in part is aimed at protecting clueless investors from themselves.
The crypto market doesn't have this, so a lot of people jump on this, consider themselves subject matter experts after a few days or weeks of reading up on stuff and following relevant subreddits, and getting swept up in the hypes (even if they don't think they are. I don't think I am. wait.)
It's the same with stock market trading, you don't need to understand how the company you're investing in works, the only thing that really matters is how much other people are interested in the company (or crypto).
The value of cryptocurrencies is not based on technology or how it works, it's based on supply and demand, which in turn is driven by trust and hype. Not unlike the stock market in a less regulated age.
I agree that currently it's purely based on speculative supply and demand. But I disagree that's what cryptocurrency is.
Bitcoin became popular because people actually used it to buy and sell stuff in the early days. And its main value was that it could provide very low transaction fee. Nowadays that's become impossible because the BTC transaction fee has risen to a ridiculous state.
For something to function as currency it needs fungibility. That used to exist in BTC but it's gone now. They're trying to come up with a solution with lightning network, sidechains, etc. But in the meantime all the vendors who used to take payments in Bitcoin have all pulled off because of the transaction fee. And we see all the other cryptocurrencies have risen up because BTC couldn't provide the value it used to provide. To be honest it's been pathetic watching the "civil war" between Bitcoin people because they've been deluded enough to believe they've already won that they were doing petty in-fighting over ego. This crash should be a wakeup call for those complacent devs to realize there's still long way to go.
So you're right that currently BTC deserves to drop all the way down, because it doesn't deserve to be a currency. Which is why I'm glad this happened. Because I was getting sick of all those people who've been parroting the "Bitcoin is fine as just a store of value" narrative. It's not, and this crash is the proof. All those people who thought they were "storing value" when there was no fungibility deserve to learn it the hard way.
Ardor I think is going to replace a lot of the current coins out there... it solves a lot of the technical issues, has child chains a much faster and more secure network, etc...
Zero sum. Also, stocks have an underlying asset. There really is none with cryptos.
Think of it as a poker game where each player hands 10$ to the dealer to sit at the table. Now, if the players are exchanging chips individual players may end up ahead, but on average at the end of the night everyone is down 10$.
Transaction fees are very much playing a deal to sit at the table. Miners do spend money to get tokens, but nobody in the game receives that money it's just gone and miners need someone else's money to get paid.
1. He just has to justify that he had a reasonable fear for it. 2. Anyway he was protecting his property
In fact, he did a very honest thing: he brandished his gun. Which means he showed the would be criminals that he was packing.
Steps to shoot a would be assailant legally:
1. Show that you're packing 2. if the would be assailant doesn't leave, aim 3. if the would be assailant doesn't leave, shoot.
Its a very fast, but choreographed dance. The point of it being that you don't just get to shoot anyone right away, you have to give them a chance to bugger off. Which they did.
EDIT: I've never owned a gun and don't really want to own one (shooting is a lot of fun, but I don't want to be a gun owner). I might buy a .22 rifle (hardly relevant for this story)
They just asked for his cash, nothing show any sign in danger in that. Would you pull out a gun because someone asked you for food too?
Was there a threat? Which kind of threat? Did it look like these guys had the means to carry that threat and did it look like they actually were going to carry that threat?
I wouldn't kill a guy in hope to get a few thousand dollars. There are cars that are worth much more than I could steal and risk much less than a homicide sentence (which I guess is pretty high in Arizona).
I don't believe his life was in danger, but I'm also not living in a country where people think their life is constantly in danger and they have to carry gun for their safety. That mentality is dangerous in itself and may justify itself sadly. Having a gun in any interaction escalate way too quickly any risk.
Yeah, that's all they said. I'm sure there was no threat in their words or mannerisms at all. Certainly, if the victim had merely given these gentlemen a firm "no," they would have just shrugged their shoulders and walked away.
It changes if they come up and demand money.
Losing a couple thousand bucks would suck, and if that was guaranteed to be the end of it then I'd rather that be the end of it. The problem is you are dealing with people who are already willing to commit robbery, there is any number of ways that situation could get violent. Once it does then who knows what happens.
2011 were the first steps in BTC usability. 2013 was the rise of alt-coins and also BTC became actually usable(mostly due to Bitpay and Gyft) 2017 it seems all speculation.
So let's take top (by market value on 12/22/2017) crypto-currencies:
1. Bitcoin - first mover, slow, expensive to use pivoted to store of value
2. Ethereum - smart contracts enabling ICO craze despite horrible contract programming language
3. Bitcoin Cash - moving to replace BTC in usability(Bitpay), but large single entity(Bitmain) influence
4. Ripple - building backbone for financial institutions, but otherwise just speculation
5. Litecoin - my 2nd love after BTC has not really advanced since 2013 and lead dev just sold all -> just speculation still
6. Cardano - smart, open, unusable -> just speculation
7. IOTA - IoT currency, premined, again why does this need high value?
8. Dash - at least has some merchant acceptance, but still pitiful
9. NEM - buzzwords but again unusable -> just speculation
10. Bitcoin Gold - BTC fork with ASIC resistance -> just speculation
11. Monero - black market usability rising
12. EOS - impressive buzzwords, unclear on why tokens should have high value
13. Stellar - a few name drops but unclear on usability
14. NEO - what a name pivot, otherwise just a vision and speculation
15. QTUM - smart apps, plus a few DAPPS, any good?
16. Ethereum Classic - the one that honors badly written smart contracts
Out of rest, Dash, Monero and Bitcoin Cash seem like potentially useful for the general public.
The rest, what use are they for the general public?
Even if we assume all are honest and produce something useful for many of these tokens it is unclear why should general public care about buying tokens.
For example why should Ripple be valued by public and speculated upon when it is only its backbone that is to be used by bigbanks?
Disclaimer: despite mining some since 2011 I am really sceptical about most crypto currencies.
TLDR; besides white papers what actually became usable in 2017?
The best thing that could happen for any meaningful development would be a crash down to 2016 levels and a stagnation period. Let the hype fade away and get back to making something useful, instead of trying to pump and dump.
Why is anyone surprised? The only shocking thing about this bubble is that it took 3 years.
you say this as if it won't happen again and again. 95%+ of crypto ownership is pure speculation. There are coins in the top 15 that don't even have existing networks yet.
It was almost as if the entire cryptocurrency space had turned into a huge unregulated casino.
I was at a couple of Bitcoin meetups recently and was surprised to find that most attendees were proudly saying that it doesn't matter if they understand how the technology works. It's one thing to not understand what you're gambling with, it's a whole another matter if everyone is actually proud about their very ignorance and even thinks of their ignorance (yet I'm still making money!) as being clever.
Unlike what some people pointed out in this thread, the price going down is not from people who got rich quick and sold. It's a panic sell.
That's what happens when you gamble with something you don't understand.