15 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 4 '17 at 15:26 comment added noɥʇʎԀʎzɐɹƆ Banking systems process far more transactions, and critically, provide credit- something Bitcoin does not do. Credit makes any financial system dangerous.
Nov 12 '14 at 11:13 comment added Sebastian Kovats That's true, bitcoin does have advantages over other payment systems but it is not better in every single way. Most normal people don't care too much about anonymity and independence, they would rather have someone (the middleman) to blame if anything goes wrong.
Nov 12 '14 at 5:59 comment added Madzi Konjo @Sebastian Kovats besides trust between buyer and seller, other payment systems also fully depend on a 3rd party middle man to facilitate the payment. Paypal, credit card companies, banks, you name it. These have proven to be untrustworthy: paypal and visa randomly blocking payments for political motives (e.g. to wikileaks), paypal randomly freezing accounts (see sites like paypalsucks.com for tons of horror stories), banks appearing in the news for one scandal after the other, etc. Bitcoin completely removes this dependency on a 3rd trusted party.
Nov 10 '14 at 6:11 comment added Madzi Konjo @Wizard Of Ozzie uhm, I don't understand your sentence? But if you're hinting about quantum computing being a problem for Bitcoin: no, it's not. On the contrary, in fact, it's a problem for most banking and other financial protocols, which are far less flexible and adaptive than Bitcoin, so it'd be an excellent opportunity for Bitcoin as a safe haven.
Nov 9 '14 at 1:08 comment added Wizard Of Ozzie @MadziKonjo then you consider quantum mechanics part if mathematics and problematic? Like it if not (I'm not getting into this btw....) the govt serves some roles
Nov 5 '14 at 23:51 comment added Jannes @sebastian multi signature transactions since this in a fundamentally better way than credit cards. Exactly because bitcoin is such a stable foundation, better solutions are being built on top of it. As for the electricity cost: that's to maintain the network, not for a specific amount of transactions. 10x more transactions and the electricity cost will still be the same. Also the electricity costs are not your problem. Other people pay for it and apparently they believe in bitcoin, you can just freely transact thanks to that.
Nov 5 '14 at 20:18 comment added Sebastian Kovats About that trust thing, Bitcoin doesn't require less trust. If you buy something with a cfedit card you have a chance of getting back your money if you're ripped off (chargeback). Since Bitcoin transactions are irreversible, you need to trust the person you're sending to even more. Thus trust isn't made obsolete, it's just moved to another instance.
Nov 5 '14 at 7:13 comment added Madzi Konjo Fiat has powerful governments, Bitcoin has powerful cryptography, transparency, lack of limitations or need for trust. I consider mathematical laws stronger than goverments laws.
Nov 4 '14 at 17:36 comment added Sebastian Kovats That's true but if mining becomes cheaper because some miners quit, it follows that the value of bitcoins will not be justified anymore if it doesn't decline. I realise that neither fiat currencies are backed and limited since the gold standard was left, but they have powerful GOVERNMENTS behind them. What's behind Bitcoin if not miners' effort ?
Nov 4 '14 at 11:54 comment added RocketNuts Sebastian Kovats, your logic is reversed. If it's no longer profitable for miners, some will quit, and mining will become cheaper, rather than tx fees going up. The mining profit (block reward) vs costs (energy consumption) will always remain in a dynamic equilibrium. And @amaclin You better put your trust in fiat currencies then :)
Nov 3 '14 at 17:11 comment added amaclin Sebastian, you are absolutely right! The cost of supporting transactions in bitcoin is much more higher, than in centralized systems. Bitcoin is alive now only because it is ponzi.
Nov 3 '14 at 13:33 comment added Sebastian Kovats That's the thing, if it's 1 million a day that's $14 per transaction (around 70.000 yesterday) which I think is comparably high (if not higher) than the cost of processing transactions in traditional banking systems. Hence i suppose that Bitcoin can only maintain its currently very appealing low transaction cost so long as miners can make a profit without charging transaction fees, which might eventually be just as high (if not higher, since miners compete which means resources are wasted) as those currently charged by banks.
Nov 2 '14 at 22:27 comment added Arturo Torres Sánchez You could improve your comparison with fiat by showing how much they (e.g. US dollar or Euro) spend every year.
Nov 2 '14 at 22:24 comment added Nick ODell The asker never used the word waste.
Nov 2 '14 at 22:18 history answered Madzi Konjo CC BY-SA 3.0