This post was originally published on this siteThis post was originally published on this siteEvery other story on Bitcoin’s price prediction or speculation is centered on the narrative that increasing investment from institutions and hedge funds will create value and fuel the price rally. However, a less popular narrative is that of the impact of mining pool concentration on Bitcoin’s speculative bubbles […] submitted by
Many of you might have already read or seen that the New York Times has published pretty big piece about blockchain titled "Beyond the Bitcoin Bubble" > read it here STARTER
When some of the people I follow and listen to on twitter say that the 35 minutes New York Times article about Blockchain is great, epic, worth the read, I get excited and anticipate some great reading. Great on a level where an article will likely be considered a landmark or will be referenced in 10 years from now to "that blockchain article in NYT"
It definitely had some fancy images to support the reading flow, but along the scrolling I started to have few comments that I considered to take a note of. I will list them here and they follow the narrative of the article and kind of feel like somebody who live-tweeted a date next to their table in some restaurant. I will admit that I have not read any of the books or pieces by Steven Johnson prior and judging this article does not take into account him as a whole, but this concrete writing about crypto. Paragraphs are chronologically numbered as I keep reading and scrolling through the article, they do not represent the equivalent paragraphs of the article - sorry ONE
Article dives right away into ethereum as some kind of sacred project of all the projects (which feels a little bit of native advertising to me or maybe I watch too much oh John Oliver). TWO
I think explaining public/private keys through ethereum is okay for the cause, but when you make such an article, you must reference Bitcoin first in my opinion (this is very dated and trivial move I know, but it is the one that started the whole cryptosphere, give it a credit WHERE it deserves). THREE
Another point to me as I scroll further and read - Seems more like a writer tries to undermine the role of currencies in our lives. Saying that internet (publishing especially) is so important. I don't agree, I see the point where he leads and yes it leads to the bigger picture of what we consume as reliable information, but currency is the underlying mechanism of our transactions and our economy. Maybe you're a theoretician in social, cultural and political behaviors but dismissing the role of something that brings food and pays bills, for being not important is a little bit snafu to me. FOUR
The tone sets article right away through its narrative that we deal with moderate socialist (I'm not against any political stances, but I would love to read more raw, real-life-kind-of-a-story, less condensed with politics (although blockchain IS politics), I would enjoy more neutral tone out of this kind of an article, something that a novice blogger would write up, religious observation and sincere and simple conclusions - that's the spirit of crypto to me. FIVE
I don’t agree with the narrative of MIGA (Make Internet Great Again), internet might be flawed but this is fundamental problem of internet, you must accept it and not move towards the vision saying "internet is kinda broken" and we will make it better. SIX
Then the narrative suddenly turns into the media criticism (I wouldn't go as deep as to criticize this move through media from Debray or McLuhan or Deleuze perspectives, I would just say that at this level John Oliver episodes are enough) and I do not envision the decentralization taking sudden narrative shift towards how broken media is (although its wrongs can be right with it, but still), there are much more interesting facts that are described later on (spoiler alert Identity). SEVEN
It is interesting that Johnson is trying to build up a narrative of a non-fake, true media but he fails at delivering the cultural prognosis for what it will bring, either way its’ an interesting deliberation to discuss, but it comes short to the point of what social structure it will bring, and to be frank this is the most boring talk right now regarding blockchain and decentralization. EIGHT
Quite frequent referral to Bitcoin as a speculative bubble, without mentioning what it has accomplished or done yet is also a big ASS LICKING NATIVE ADVERTISING MOVE NINE
Bitcoin speculative bubble is not tech bubble's garage sale!!! TEN
I agree with him saying that bitcoin is harming itself in the short term with the type of people it attracts, because well who doesn't want to make money? Thanks God millennials can make money. Also it looks like that all this paragraph is doing is that it is referencing charlatans mostly to bitcoin, while making ethereum stay out clean, like the sacred solution to the post bitcoin speculative bubble, like the hailed blockchain, solution to the wronged media Johnson dislikes that much - at this point I question whether I should continue to read this thing further. It sucks because i jumped on this article with much passion and it kinda deteriorated just before me hitting the middle of the text. ELEVEN
As a disclosure I'm long Ether (for some degenerates who think I hate ethereum: no I hate this article so far and I love Ethereum). TWELVE
Also interesting, if the author is having a suggestion of how we create decentralized digital identity? He drops it here and there before getting into the details, like having a total grasp of what does digital identity mean. THIRTEEN
Crypto is great because you can sniff/sense the intruder with agenda, I unfortunately sniff Johnson as the one, although I'm not saying that who people want to join at any stage and are eager to learn are the bad actors, not at all, I guess most people who change things are usually late to the game, they were doing something interesting and valuable prior to joining. What i have issue with is the pretentiousness of NYT watermark to the opinion on crypto that must be lauded and accepted. FOURTEEN
Credit to be given where needed, GPS example is a great example, and Protocol storyline is very clear, I hope you don't take that you're the Protocol visionary of course Steven :D FIFTEEN
And here is the newbie detected, I don't have an idea of how in 90s while developing communication protocols, developers would solve identity? Identity solution lies within government compliance, or if you're deeply into decentralization and sovereign identity into biometric restoration etc.and delegation to still “trusted” accounts. Identity done poorly is just a sweetener for a better identity theft that Steven so much dislikes. SIXTEEN
OMG that duplex drop was bombastic :D I mean, is this author at all published or something? (Oh yeah pretty well published and best-seller, I guess my opinion now doesn’t matter :( ) SEVENTEEN
I love Juan Benet, but the again, for the God’s sake, can you lick any more of Ethereum's ass? I mean it IS so native advertising (so far). EIGHTEEN
Path from open to closed protocols is also good sighted observation :) Thanks for bringing this up!!! NINETEEN
Well thanks for introducing the piece of technology, in the middle of the article, that gave birth to your hailed topic of writing, I take back everything I have said before, yeah we will change the internet and will have sovereign identities all while bitcoin is a failure of a project - yeah so totally. TWENTY
When author says "for our purpose" oh yeah we will grant you a Ph.D degree after we finish reading this article - for the sake of its purpose man, for the sake of its purpose. TWENTY-ONE
Oh Buterni's “miniature versions of bitcoin bubble” sounds like a sweet baby bath procedure. Yeah ICOs and ERC20 are just such a feather <3 (by this time I'm considering buying a ticket to DC (because I've already checked and google says that the author lives in Washington DC) and give him a punch. TWENTY-TWO
Okay so far with ICO and everything said before in this article - it seems like a beautifully jammed piece on everything that happened in crypto embellished with Dixon quotes here and there as the remedy for some sincere crypto enthusiast. TWENTY-THREE
Fred Wilson on securities law fraud is a nice one, kinda drop of bearishness into the reality, but then again go check how Fred argues with Preston Byrne in tweets (oh well Preston is mostly trolling Fred I'd say). TWENTY-FOUR
Really folks, we got shoved up right in front of our faces Decentralized Uber example <3 - and you call this good writing? TWENTY-FIVE
A Knock-off of Wilson's take on fat protocols seems cheap. TWENTY-SIX
I've worked quite a lot on digital identity (crypto or just PKI), and I don't think anything stated here is truly valuable. TWENTY-SEVEN
What the fuck is this supposed to mean: "An open identity standard would give ordinary people the opportunity to sell their attention to the highest bidder, or choose to keep it out of the marketplace altogether"? TWENTY-EIGHT
If you downsize digital identity importance to the point of getting paid for the cat memes, your place is in the meme hell. TWENTY-NINE
Summation that is acceptable: Yes open protocols work better than closed ones (thank you for that at least Steven). THIRTY
Was that allusion to ethereum logo that the article ends with? THIRTY-ONE
Well frankly I believe in ethereum and I love the platform for it being flexible and many million reasons more and I do not believe that it needs such a write-up article. If this is a PSA kind of a thing to the wider audience, then I think its self-pretentious and sometimes cynical and political tone with "literary" words here and there are pure disservice to the cause. Better copy paste coindesk articles. THIRTY-TWO
And I do think and believe that I will like Steven's literary works much much more than this article and for some reason I think other articles might be better than this, crypto is very intricate space, please just be yourself Steven. THIRTY-THREE
Trivial but as Ray Dalio puts it you need to feel pain in order be sincere and evolve, feels like Steven has not lost shitload of money, or time, or nerves dealing with crypto.
Bitcoin and non-Bitcoin cryptocurrencies or crypto-platforms (altcoins) have seen a crazy rise in total value, at $156 Billion, up from $20 Billion this Jan. A few of the coins seem to have value or product, but the vast majority do not. Bitcoin itself is hardly used as a currency, its actual intended use. submitted by
Given that there appears to be no way to ascribe valuations to the coins that traditional assets classes use (revenues, dividends, profits), all values that investors pay for the tokens have no basis whatsoever, and therefore aren't worthy of investment.
There are similar traits to the crypto markets as the dotcom boom, including people throwing money at new coins when they have no idea what they actually do. Currency valuations tend to be this loop of "cryptocurrencies are worth what people will pay for them", which means that there value is essentially limitless to infinity, and doesnt't give me any confidence.
On the flipside, blockchain technology is truly revolutionary for some items, including record keeping and sending currency instantly and for free, and for document auditing. Cryptocurrencies also makes sense, if the price stables eventually, for money storage, over gold.
That said, investors are throwing money at crypto markets in increasing amounts, but most of the coins, outside of something like Euthereum, promise nothing in return except the promise of high returns due to speculative increase, just like the dot-com boom. This is either the biggest bull market we will see in our lifetimes, or one of the biggest bubbles.
I know similar questions have been asked, but mine pertains more to the altcoin and crypto market as a whole, not just bitcoin.
I just noticed that the first sentence in Wikipedia for Bitcoin states that Bitcoin is a speculative Bubble. It just seems wrong that it states that. Can someone change it? submitted by
The price movement of Bitcoin is driven by supply and demand, based on speculation of Bitcoin’s future. No-one knows how Bitcoin will evolve and what role it will play in 10 years time. But what we do know is that Bitcoin is a nascent technology and that future application is not really quantifiable, so over speculation and bubbles are to be ... Tags Bitcoin Speculation Volatility Economic bubbles Business cycle Initial coin offering Finance Money Alternative currencies Cryptocurrencies View the discussion thread. Most Popular With the price of bitcoin moving toward $12,000, a top economist on Tuesday sent a stark warning to investors: The cryptocurrency is in a "dangerous speculative bubble." "This is a toxic concept ... In the great Bitcoin bubble of late 2017, the honor goes to John McAfee, founder of computer security company McAfee LLC, and passionate cryptocurrency evangelist. On Dec 7, 2017, he wrote ... Bitcoin may be following a classic pattern that speculative bubbles take as they pop. Bitcoin may be following a classic pattern that speculative bubbles take as they pop. Explore.
As the value of Bitcoin goes stratospheric, speculation grows over the future of the king of the crypto-currencies. Welcome to our latest Bank of Cardiff review. Everywhere you go, people are talking about Bitcoin! Some say it's a bubble, some say it's the future, but everyone agrees on one thing!The meteoric price rise of bitcoin in 2017 has been nothing ... Im discussing the macro catalysts that have the potential to create a major Vertcoin bubble leading into 2018. By observing 2013/14 market conditions that allowed the Litecoin bubble, we apply ... Virtual currency bitcoin has officially become the largest bubble in history, eclipsing the notorious "Tulip Mania," the speculative bubble that shook the Du... I found many conversations in chat are about about cryptos. I want to talk about speculative bubbles of the past and share what I learned from them.