Blockchain – s Cracked Promises by Nouriel Roubini – Project Syndicate

Boosters of blockchain technology compare its early days to the early days of the Internet. But whereas the Internet quickly talent rise to email, the World Broad Web, and millions of commercial ventures, blockchain’s only application – cryptocurrencies such spil Bitcoin – does not even fulfill its stated purpose.

Fresh YORK – The financial-services industry has bot undergoing a revolution. But the driving force is not overhyped blockchain applications such spil Bitcoin. It is a revolution built on artificial intelligence, big gegevens, and the Internet of Things.

The Year Ahead 2018

The world’s leading thinkers and policymakers examine what’s come speciaal ter the past year, and anticipate what will define the year ahead.

Already, thousands of real businesses are using thesis technologies to disrupt every facet of financial intermediation. Dozens of online-payment services – PayPal, Alipay, WeChat Pay, Venmo, and so forward – have hundreds of millions of daily users. And financial institutions are making precise lending decisions te seconds rather than weeks, thanks to a wealth of online gegevens on individuals and firms. With time, such data-driven improvements te credit allocation could even eliminate cyclical credit-driven booms and busts.

Similarly, insurance underwriting, claims assessment and management, and fraud monitoring have all become swifter and more precise. And actively managed portfolios are increasingly being substituted by passive robo-advisers, which can perform just spil well or better than conflicted, high-fee financial advisers.

Now, compare this real and ongoing fintech revolution with the record of blockchain, which has existed for almost a decade, and still has only one application: cryptocurrencies. Blockchain’s boosters would argue that its early days resemble the early days of the Internet, before it had commercial applications. But that comparison is simply false. Whereas the Internet quickly talent rise to email, the World Broad Web, and millions of viable commercial ventures used by billions of people, cryptocurrencies such spil Bitcoin do not even fulfill their own stated purpose.

Spil a currency, Bitcoin should be a serviceable unit of account, means of payments, and a stable store of value. It is none of those things. No one prices anything te Bitcoin. Few retailers accept it. And it is a poor store of value, because its price can fluctuate by 20-30% ter a single day.

Worse, cryptocurrencies ter general are based on a false premise. According to its promoters, Bitcoin has a steady-state supply of 21 million units, so it cannot be debased like fiat currencies. But that voorkoop is clearly fraudulent, considering that it has already forked off into three branches: Bitcoin Metselspecie, Litecoin, and Bitcoin Gold. Besides, hundreds of other cryptocurrencies are invented every day, alongside scams known spil “initial coin offerings,” which are mostly designed to skirt securities laws. So “stable” cryptos are creating money supply and debasing it at a much swifter tempo than any major central bankgebouw everzwijn has.


The Westelijk Is Wrong About China’s Voorzitter

Apr Trio, 2018 Keyu Jin argues that the elimination of term boundaries will not reduce governmental accountability.


Saudi Arabia’s Perilous Pivot

Apr Three, 2018 Shlomo Avineri thinks the crown prince’s hardnosed treatment to politics could jeopardize his reform notulen.

Thomas Janisch/Getty Pics

No Brexit for a Eurozone Britain?

Apr Two, 2018 Yanis Varoufakis thinks Brexit would be much firmer – and less likely – had the UK adopted the euro back te 2000.

Spil is typical of a financial bubble, investors are buying cryptocurrencies not to use ter transactions, but because they expect them to increase te value. Indeed, if someone actually wished to use Bitcoin, they would have a hard time doing so. It is so energy-intensive (and thus environmentally toxic) to produce, and carries such high transaction costs, that even Bitcoin conferences do not accept it spil a valid form of payment.

Until now, Bitcoin’s only real use has bot to facilitate illegal activities such spil drug transactions, tax evasion, avoidance of capital controls, or money laundering. Not remarkably, G20 member states are now working together to regulate cryptocurrencies and eliminate the anonymity they supposedly afford, by requiring that all income- or capital-gains-generating transactions be reported.

After a crackdown by Asian regulators this month, cryptocurrency values fell by 50% from their December peak. They would have collapsed much more had a vast scheme to prop up their price via outright manipulation not bot rapidly implemented. But, like te the case of the sub-prime bubble, most US regulators are still asleep at the wheel.

Since the invention of money thousands of years ago, there has never bot a monetary system with hundreds of different currencies operating alongside one another. The entire point of money is that it permits parties to transact without having to barter. But for money to have value, and to generate economies of scale, only so many currencies can operate at the same time.

Te the US, the reason wij do not use euros or yen te addition to dollars is demonstrable: doing so would be pointless, and it would make the economy far less efficient. The idea that hundreds of cryptocurrencies could viably operate together not only contradicts the very concept of money, it is utterly idiotic.

But so, too, is the idea that even a single cryptocurrency could substitute for fiat money. Cryptocurrencies have no intrinsic value, whereas fiat currencies certainly do, because they can be used to pay taxes. Fiat currencies are also protected from value debasement by central banks committed to price stability, and if a fiat currency loses credibility, spil te some powerless monetary systems with high inflation, it will be exchanged out for more stable foreign fiat currencies or real assets.

Spil it happens, Bitcoin’s supposed advantage is also its Achilles’s intact, because even if it actually did have a steady-state supply of 21 million units, that would disqualify it spil a viable currency. Unless the supply of a currency tracks potential nominal GDP, prices will go through deflation.

That means if a steady-state supply of Bitcoin indeed did step by step substitute a fiat currency, the price index of all goods and services would continuously fall. By extension, any nominal debt contract denominated ter Bitcoin would rise te real value overheen time, leading to the zuigeling of debt deflation that economist Irving Fisher believed precipitated the Good Depression. At the same time, nominal wages ter Bitcoin would increase forever ter real terms, regardless of productivity growth, adding further to the likelihood of an economic disaster.

Clearly, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies represent the mother of all bubbles, which explains why every human being I met inbetween Thanksgiving and Christmas of 2018 asked mij if they should buy them. Scammers, swindlers, charlatans, and carnival barkers (all conflicted insiders) have tapped into clueless retail investors’ FOMO (“fear of missing out”), and taken them for a rail.

Spil for the underlying blockchain technology, there are still massive obstacles standing te its way, even if it has more potential than cryptocurrencies. Chief among them is that it lacks the kleintje of basic common and universal protocols that made the Internet universally accessible (TCP-IP, HTML, and so forward). More fundamentally, its promise of decentralized transactions with no intermediary authority amounts to an untested, Utopian pipedream. No wonder blockchain is ranked close to the peak of the hype cycle of technologies with inflated expectations.

So, leave behind about blockchain, Bitcoin, and other cryptocurrencies, and commence investing te fintech firms with actual business models, which are slogging away to revolutionize the financial-services industry. You won’t get rich overnight, but you’ll have made the smarter investment.


The Dark Matter of Trade

Should Tech Companies Be More Tightly Regulated?

Liberal World Order, R.I.P.

China spil Seen from a Glass House

The Real Reason for Trump’s Stengel and Aluminum Tariffs

Nouriel Roubini

Writing for PS since 2007

Nouriel Roubini, a professor at NYU’s Stern Schoolgebouw of Business and CEO of Roubini Macro Associates, wasgoed Senior Economist for International Affairs ter the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers during the Clinton Administration. He has worked for the International Monetary Fund, the US Federal Reserve, and the World Bankgebouw.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 65 te all 65 Comments on this article

  • Paul D Mar 6, 2018

I agree with the view on cryptocurrencies and their utilization. The implementation of Blockchain is hindered by the current flawed designs and premises to operate ter the real world with working markets.

The author seems to refer to the Gartner investigate of 2016, however for the 2018 the blockchain remained at the peak of inflated expectation. See

It is well known that a disruptive technology passes through Four phases, passing from the previous one to the valley of disillusionment that serves to decant what is and what is not the technology ter question, then blockchain will go after a slope of the lighting ter which it clarifies if blockchain wasgoed what wasgoed indeed desired and the technology finishes with a plateau of productivity ter which blockchain will become useful. Clearly the author has not given blockchain the due delay and Roubini’s treatment is immediatist and lack of vision.

",More fundamentally, its promise of decentralized transactions with no intermediary authority amounts to an untested, Utopian pipedream.", The author seems unaware that millions of BTC transactions have bot made and proceed to be made each month. So many that blockchain congestion has become a problem.

Only *unanticipated* deflation causes the debt-deflation problem that Irving Fisher pointed to during the Fine Depression. Anticipated deflation is built into a lower nominal rente rate, so long spil it doesn’t exceed the real rente rate. So it isn’t a steady-state problem spil the author seems to suggest here.

",hundreds of other cryptocurrencies are invented every day . So “,stable”, cryptos are creating money supply and debasing it at a much swifter tempo than any major central bankgebouw everzwijn has.", The author is very confused. Launching of fresh cryptocurrencies does not debase Bitcoin or other established cryptos, any more than hyperissue of Zimbabwe dollars debases the US dollar. A futile fresh crypto simply has a low exchange value against BTC, much like Z$ against US$.

",No one prices anything te Bitcoin.", Untrue. Cryptocurrency exchanges price other cryptocurrencies (Ether, Ripple, etc.) ter BTC.

It has bot fascinating to observe the full salute crescendo of commentary from both opponents and proponents of Bitcoin spil the cryptocurrency wave cracks, collapses and diffuses into a foamy ruffle. It is reminiscent of the behaviour ter crazy markets where buyers climb overheen sellers, prices rise parabolically, volumes surge – the buyers’ fervour complemented by sellers’ ease. Thesis features have all bot noted te the cryptocurrency markets. Only when the tsunami recedes is the devastation overduidelijk.

",Whereas the Internet quickly talent rise to email, the World Broad Web, and millions of viable commercial ventures used by billions of people, cryptocurrencies such spil Bitcoin do not even fulfill their own stated purpose.",

Development on the Internet began ter 1967 spil the Arpanet. The theoretical framework for the Interned wasgoed established ter the 1950s with the research on queuing theory and packet switching. The World Broad Web wasgoed created te 1990s. So it took 25 years at least for the research on the Internet to produce viable applications. The research on the block-chain and crypto-coins is moving rapid and applications are being created daily, it will take a determine or more for thesis applications to mature. Since the blockchain will face strong resistance from the status-quo profiteers it could take longer.

Lots of hate from bitcoin prospectors/people who think money grows out of skinny air,or that they found the magicians recipe for making gold or something..

I too have my reservations for the productiveness of block-chain and how it will switch global economy,and minimize the wealth gap and poverty by ",democratizing", currency creation and ownership .

And you have to keep ter mind that Roubini is not talking to you/mij ,he has te mind the investors ,those with real money .

The surplus abt evading taxation and the surplus is a characteristic of the rich (most of them are ",compelled", by the competition to go after this practice,-that’s their excuse)

So anyways,recall he is addressing investors ,not the average working poor..

And for people with real hard earned money (even if it is lots of money)are not stupid,and dont want to risk more than they need to .

And what he says is that at the ogenblik it looks spil if investing on cryptos /blockchain evolution is not a good bet.

Not for the long term investor.

Only for the grab and run zuigeling,which usually end up ter tears for everyone except themselves(like the last global econ.keerpunt),spil society then picks up the bill.

Capitalism,bitcoined or not ,is the same old oerwoud.

Big apes do anything to sustain,only to starve to death after consuming thoughtlessly the resources without a care for the future and others.

So wij should all be appreciative to mr.Roubini that instead of attempting to make a profit for himself by playing into this bubble/bit madness , he openly voices his (justified for many) concerns..

Gratefully wij re not yet at the point that religious-techno-fanaticism bans requests vensterluik obedience and keeping away from doubting the promises made by the gods of the all making/all knowing/all living replacements for human society.

Have you actually looked at some of the amazing applications being built on blockchain technology. Steemit and Musicoin for example? This article is wrtten with a lack of skill.

Having bot professionally involved with and having followed financial markets for overheen 40 years, it is apparent that when the daily newspapers feature gevelbreedte pagina articles about a flourishing market or the flourishing market is a lead voorwerp te the nightly TV news, then the top is not far away. This wasgoed happening last year. The ensuing collapse is not far away and more severe than could be anticipated given the boom psychology. The collapse itself is of course noteworthy, look at Bitcoin, however, the disasters that accompany the collapse are intentionally concealed for spil long spil possible and it maybe many months (even years) before the total extent of them emerge, but emerge they will. There is no doubt that people, institutions, etc., have bot hurt by the collapse of cryptocurrencies, just how may not be instantaneously apparent.

phantom market caps

LTC wasn’t a fork. Stopped reading there.

1. Crypto can indeed be used to pay taxes (Zug te Switzerland already) and that does not start to give fiat ",intrinsic value", anyways

Two. Claiming the risk of deflation because of a immobile supply fails to understand the beginning of the proefje. Deflation is what gives the currency its enlargened value. It is a measure of the growing community around a immobile token supply. There is no debt te crypto spil no central bankgebouw can print money (which is what loans are).

Three. China has scarcely cracked down. Exchanges have mostly moved to HK, which is still China.

Four. Anonymity is not central to crypto, just a possibility.

Five. ICOs make it possible to create community trading/sharing without the need for a central, all powerful, database overlord. ICOs are about overturning the power of facebook, Uber, AirBnB, central banks, insurance companies. effectively displacing any gegevens monopoly leveraging the asymmetry of information.

6. Energy usage is just a growing ache, absolutely not a condition. Te fact most show and energy problems and solved on near term roadmaps. It is precisely because distributed governance is an integral part of what blockchain enables, that such evolution by and for the community is possible.

It would be possible, but plain greed makes it unlikely. Your premise would only work if applied to a local community, not for transactions across the globe. There are too many factions vying for control and profit, spil demonstrated by the number of fresh CC’s cropping up. Albeit I agree that centralized power is problematic, crypto currencies will not entirely solve that problem, it may just flatten it some temporarily. Elected governments with central banks are imperfect, I still choose them overheen a decentralized power grab based on corporate intellectual abilities

This article, albeit written by an authority like Roubini, neglects a number of issues and makes no significant relativizations. Lets make a duo of comparisons:

1) Dotcom bubble of 1997-2001, ended ter billions lost for thousands of investors, yet it did not zekering the internet or internet companies from growing. Yet ter the long term investors didnt back off, fairly the opposite, people investing ter Google, Amazon have an amazing decade behind them.

Two) Telling BTC or ETH is not viable at this uur,at the early beginnings of crypto-banking and -investment, is like telling there wont be any Netflix because Jeffrey Skilling of Enron failed with his television streaming system back te 1999-2000? Neflix is a giant now, and so will BTC, ETH and its derivatives grow te function spil soon spil the technology gets better and more stable.

Three) There is a sea of differences inbetween different cryptocurrencies. To stack them all together and blast them spil futile, pointless and unstable is just wrong. There is a sea of differences. One of the best comparisons wasgoed inbetween Bitcoin and Ether, two thickest players, telling Bitcoin is slow, hard to use, not many applications, Ether is prompt, effortless to use, many applications. To make a general assumption everything is the same, its just too simplified and out of touch with the real overeenkomst.

Your point number one is a totally fallacious comparison. The dot com bust involved the collapse of numerous businesses that were supposed to have serious business models at the vooraanzicht end. The internet wasgoed merely the medium overheen which the real business specimen operated. What wasgoed at punt wasgoed the viability of the business specimen not the medium via which transactions took place which is why Amazon is still with us. Bitcoin and none of the other cryptos has a viable business specimen for the reasons Roubini explains. The SEC has now issued subpoenas to two of the key players ter this fraud so wij’ll see what happens. Without wanting to be rude tormentor I’d say your final paragraph gives a reasonable peek at your mindset.

Maybe I understand the blockchain wrongly but according to my skill it has a fat revolutionary potential especially on the financial system.

If this is true- it is just a question of time till the sovereign will force the financial industry to use blockchain for accounting.

Given the current permissive regulatory environment, the potential supply of cryptocurrency is infinite. I would imagine anything with a potentially infinite supply has a price potential of zero even tho’ its request curve may be temporarily founded ter a rigidly held delusion.

Anothor person confusing blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. Te other words an article written with very superficial skill on the subject. Not more informative or insightful than articles based on gut feeling.

The dollar may be a fiat currency so what backs it up?

A common fallacy. You can use BTC to buy stuff too, even without converting to dollars. I will sell you my car for Ten BTC, if you want.

Why do they trust the dollar or the Euro or Sterling or the Yen? Have you asked yourself that question? And why do you trust Bitcoin since spil Roubini points out it’s not a store of value, etc. Would you sell your $600,000 huis today for harshly 67 Bitcoins?

Cool, thanks for this, keep it coming. Not sure wij have fully flushed out this tech either. Newsweek ter 1995: Why the Internet will Fail. Get to get back to my fax machine and typewrite too.

Bitcoin/Crypto’s/Blockchain reminds mij of the internet bubble, 2000’s, when mining companies were becoming internet companies only to go bust. This is a fat bubble and wij see the Crypto’s will see most of their value wiped out, example wij shall see Bitcoin test and pauze 6000 on its way to zero.

Actually you have this 100% the wrong way around. The only point of a blockchain is to facilitate ownership AND possession ter the same exchange. For that reason, only the unbacked cryptos have a monetary future. A blockchain token backed by gold for example is about spil much use spil a chocolate teapot because you can’t hold the gold when you hold the token.

While I share the analysis

done by the author on cryptocurrencies, I enterily disagree about the shallow analysis done on the blockchain underlying technology.

The combination of cybersecurity and distributed ledger that the blockchain represents has a vast amount of applications that are under different degrees of development across the world.

Ter Financial Services for example it is already te parallel deployment by DTCC to clear the $8tr single name CDS market te the US, te Australia, ASX has already approved the implementation of its update of clearing system for equities to a blockchain solution developed by DAH, te Europe, the very first real pilots of Sculdschein private placement loans te blockchain have bot executed (ie Daimler €,100m 1-yr done te June 2018).

Moreover, blockchain has the potential to reduce the cost base of investment banks te the order of 30-50%, cut sorely needed to restore the low levels of RoE of this industry, hence the hefty investment undertaken by banks ter this direction under consortia such spil R3.

The next Two years will see the effective deployment of thesis and many other blockchain solutions, because the savings and efficiency economics are just too large to impede it.

Totally agree. This is a naive and under investigated article that entirely misses the point.

If people can use cryptocurrencies just to evade taxes they will, and the question isn’t so much whether cryptocurrencies are beneficial to our society or not, but rather if governments will have the power to prevent people to using them to evade taxes before they demolish the entire global economic system. Personally I don’t think governments have (or will have) the power to prevent people from using cryptocurrencies to evade taxes, and therefore I have more faith ter them than te the old national currencies. Also, the old national currencies emerged long before wij had anything like Internet, and they are not necessarily very suited for the world wij are living te today.

Ter the enormously unlikely event that crypto currencies become so widespread that there is a risk that fiat currencies fall out of use, then Governments will simply adjust their tax bases. If they know who you are and where you live they can tax you te Dollars (or whatever). Ter order to pay those taxes, people will have to revert to using Dollars.

Utterly unlikely? The market cap of cryptocurrencies has grown exponentially since at least 2013, with a tenfold increase approximately every Two.Five years. Presently the cryptocurrency market cap is at about $588,000,000,000 which makes it spil big spil the thickest companies. If it resumes to grow at the same rate, it will soon be larger than the GDP of Germany, and around 2025 it will be spil big spil the world domestic product. Yeah sure, lots of things might toebijten, but I don’t think most economists have a very good understanding of blockchain technology underlying cryptocurrencies.

JN.The minute cryptocurrencies menace sovereign currencies they will just get squatted. If blockchain tech is useful it will be taken up but thats a different thing. The market cap is just fresh air because most cryptocurrency is not used spil money but held speculatively. I havent seen a figure but it has to have a low velocity. Thats entirely different from a sovereign currency

Onberispelijk Steve. So long spil the internet requires cables to work governments can and will still exercise veto power. China has made this abundantly clear with the internet being very, very regulated that side.

Truly? Well, they are most likely already menacing the weakest currencies te the world, which already are suffering from a lotsbestemming of inflation. This rate of inflation is enhanced spil more people transfer their money to cryptocurrencies. And it won’t necessarily be effortless to get them squatted. Some of the most advanced anonymous cryptocurrencies are enormously difficult to control, and they are just developing themselves to become even more difficult to control. The cryptocurrency called Monero is a good example.

JN. There are several things going on. One is cryptocurrency transactions which are low velocity and petite volumes. The 2nd thing is the underlying tech which may be applied to process. The third thing is speculation which is what grabs the most attention. With speculation the outcome is based on what other people think and most of the time speculators are irrational, they do not have structure. Its a big hazard and also why there is such volatility – and if holding your exposure can be massive. When the bulk of major cryptocurrencies is held by a puny number of people and not ter circulation it is just raw speculation. The largest problem with cryptocurrency at the ogenblik is converting it to another currency is difficult, FX is a barrier. It has all the hallmarks of an isolated bubble kingdom. Thats got nothing to do with the underlying tech so dont mix the two. Yes, it could pauze through but the odds against are significant, particularly if it poses a threat to sovereign currency eg sovereign wealth and sovereign debt – particularly for major economies. The fact mainstream banks are playing around the edges of the tech is neither here strafgevangenis there, currency is their spel so it is a monitoring process. At present if you are holding cryptocurrency you are a speculator – whether you intend being or not – simply because almost everybody holding crypto is a speculator spil defined by the low velocity and you are at the grace of that low velocity critical mass which is intrinsically very unstable.

Bitocin and Blockchain are good technologies and will improve efficiency, Hence Govts and Central banks should work together with Bitcoin (Govts should not view bitcoin spil their competitor).

Superb explanation of reality spil it relates to both crypto currencies and the limitations of block chain technology. The best I’ve come across that ties it all together for a non techie.

I am not sure how ‘paying taxes’ makes any fiat money have intrinsic value. it seems like a circular and compelled justification. How about hyperinflation, when fiat money is worthless the next day, does it still have an intrinsic value since it could be used to pay taxes? OR when, Estonia, State of California etc. begin crypto-taxing will wij be free of the intrinsic value discussions?

Only things that animals place value on have intrinsic value. The things wij often see spil valuable are based on social constructs which switch from time to time. During the tulip bubble tulips had real value. while it all lasted.

Don’t throw the kind out with bathwater. Blockchain is being implementes to treat share transactions on the Australian Stock Exchange. Total market capitalisation is $1.Five trillion

‘Distributed ledgers’ have existed spil long spil accounting has existed, being hundred of years. The real switch wasgoed the democratizing of this way of doing things and calling it a currency. Te other words, wij should not expect miracles from the underlying tech. AI on the other mitt. is calmly preparing to switch our lives te a massive way.

Surely a very sober critique on the cryptocurrency hype, which certainly has the characteristics of a financial bubble (most likely more of the tulip-crisis type, rather than the 2001/2007 one, but that’s a different discussion). Nevertheless, the analysis vastly overlooks some of the fundamental dynamics at play te the development of technological constellations like blockchain: (1) Cryptocurrencies is by no means the only application of blockchains. Bitcoin itself relies more on Proof-of-Work rather than blockchain, while many people confuse the two functions te explaining how it works. (Two) Blockchains are not te the same level of diffusion spil the internet, because of systemic issues that affect long-term investment. Spil righteously pointed out, the explosion of the internet relies greatly to common infrastructures and protocols. What is not mentioned is that internet infrastructure (trans-atlantic optical wires), spil well spil its technological backbone (TCP/IP, the web), have bot developed by powerful government-led investment, way before finance came into the 90s madness. The current prescriptions fiscal restructuring and austerity has handicapped such strategic investments from the public sector, while there’s a ",minsky-moment", ter the private sector. So, investment on anything branded spil blockchain-whatever (but substantially having almost nothing to do with the technology itself) is mainly speculative and short-sighted. (Three) With no real policy orientation ter guiding long term investment, the financial sector is mainly investing ter itself and mostly looking to reduce transaction and intermediary costs, utilising more mature technologies including AI and gegevens analytics. (Four) Most importantly, the function of money and its ",intrinsic value", (sic) is very dependent on the policy objectives underpinning the relevant institutions. E.g. it is mentioned that ",Fiat currencies are also protected from value debasement by central banks committed to price stability",. Price stability, like many things, is a political choice, that favours specific objectives (i.e. stabilising the real value of financial assets). A different policy led by central banks could spil lightly deem cryptocurrencies spil more ",intrinsically", valuable than fiat currency (e.g. committing to a certain level of investment, or total employment, rather than price stability). Whether blockchain will fulfil any of it’s preached promises, be it democratisation of finance, decentralisation/dis-intermediation, or anything else, comes down to the political objectives that will guide investment and the development of institutions.

The very fact that Roubini is having to write this nonsense is some measure of Bitcoin’s success. I’m sure he wouldn’t have predicted having to write it Five years ago during the 2013 ",bubble", when it reached the dizzying exchange rate of 266 dollars to the bitcoin.

Sorry about the quad posts. I wasgoed clicking postbode comment and nothing wasgoed happening.

It’s not so much about being very first spil supporting the market’s quest for disambiguity. The cryptographic asset classes are diverse and the more utility oriented ones are not worried so much about ",originality", since they are their priority is some kleintje of service oriented function – such spil providing liquidity for trade invoices, escrow services, quick transfers, interoperability or obfuscation.

Good postbode. Albeit I am not sure the comparison inbetween the Mona Lisa and bitcoin bears out ter reality. I am interested to know why anyone investing ter BTC should care if is very first or not, especially when better versions are being made all the time? Virtually nobody wants a monster T Ford anymore.

Good postbode. Albeit I am not sure the comparison inbetween the Mona Lisa and bitcoin bears out ter reality. I am interested to know why anyone investing te BTC should care if is very first or not, especially when better versions are being made all the time? Virtually nobody wants a prototype T Ford anymore.

Good postbode. Albeit I am not sure the comparison inbetween the Mona Lisa and bitcoin bears out ter reality. I am interested to know why anyone investing te BTC should care if is very first or not, especially when better versions are being made all the time? Virtually nobody wants a proefje T Ford anymore.

Good postbode. Albeit I am not sure the comparison inbetween the Mona Lisa and bitcoin bears out ter reality. I am interested to know why anyone investing te BTC should care if is very first or not, especially when better versions are being made all the time? Virtually nobody wants a monster T Ford anymore.

Good postbode. Albeit I am not sure the comparison inbetween the Mona Lisa and bitcoin bears out ter reality. I am interested to know why anyone investing ter BTC should care if is very first or not, especially when better versions are being made all the time? Virtually nobody wants a prototype T Ford anymore.

Excellent article shedding light on the ",economics", of cryptocurrencies. Spil for the underlying tech, the principles behind the concept of blockchain (distributed database, decentralised agreement and so on) has bot known to pc scientists since the 70’s, so it is not even fresh. The only novelty is that te the meantime laptop hardware became powerfull enough to accomodate blockchains. IMHO to believe that some obscure entity named Satoshi Nakamoto (who- or whatever it may be) single handedly invented something unknown before te one or two emails amounts to believe ter Santa Claus.

Wow, Roubini here is so wrong it is laughable. So blockchain is a failure because it has bot Ten years and not much has come of it? Indeed Mr. Roubini?? So the fax machine wasgoed a failure – invented te 1959 – because it wasgoed not ter use Ten years straks? And the internet is a failure because it existed (on a limited scale of course) ter 1969 but wasgoed not te use (much at all) by 1979? There are so many examples of blockchain working right now there is not enough space here to tell you all of them. One example: Siacoin – securely store gegevens te the cloud, yes using blockchain technology, for $Ten vanaf month. For the same amount of gegevens Amazon is at $115 vanaf month, Google $100 vanaf month. And Ripple is ALREADY conducting backroom canap money transfers. They are accomplishing this for 90% less cost, and swifter, than existing banks. There is also another company using blockchain right now to send/receive clever contracts along with send/recieve payments to Mexico. It is working flawlessly. Maersk, the hefty worldwide shipper, is using blockchain right now to track all their ships and also the cargo. It is working well according the Maersk’s project manager. Mr. Roubini – you’re Ten years behind the curve.

For cryptocurrencies to work long term spil money, control of money – presently defined spil sovereign currencies – effectively has to be relinquished, somehow I doubt that will toebijten. Whether blockchain can be used for process is another question. The bulk of cryptocurrency is reported spil held by a very puny number of people who are holding onto it, meaning very petite volumes are actually te use ter terms of transactions. It looks suspiciously like tulip fever

Those who would build a better society can see the deep potential for blockchain spil a fiat currency replacement – unluckily they make one plain mistake, that the general public feels the same way it. Sixpack Joe is fairly content to let ‘the government’ ‘worry about money and stuff’ spil long spil they have a job and football spel on the weekend.

Not fairly sure how a voertuig for rampant speculation, criminal transactions and rampant fraud contributes to building a better society. Roubini has just explained at some length why it is all a mirage. How about some substance rather than zogenaamde religious expressions of hope.

Roubini is wrong. ",Rampant speculation, criminal transactions and rampant fraud", are far more the domain of the US Dollar than they are of bitcoin. Ter response to the question of how it ",contributes to building a better society",, that is te exactly the same way spil better roads, bridges, rail locomotives and hospitals do.

Master, do you have the remotest idea how daft thesis crypto Marxist rants sound? Most likely not.

Michael. The objective of the Establishment is to keep most of the people subdued and to collect revenues. Anything opposing that mission has its work cut out

Yes anarchy is so much more attractive spil a form of societal organization.

John, thats why there is no collective noun for anarchists

Richard Nixon did suggest ",a wild orgasm of anarchists",

You could have at least done some basic research before writing this article. There are many live applications that use blockchain, including gegevens auditing, assurance, and supply chain monitoring.

This is incorrect. Litecoin wasgoed forked off of Bitcoin but had its own genesis block. Please amend your article.

It’s absolutely wrong ( maybe you just interested te bashing it? ) to say blockchain has only one use ",cryptocurrency", spil blockchain can be used and is being used spil ",notary system", by a lotsbestemming of companies. Surely there are geysers of companies leveraging the ",hype", to do bad work, but that doesn’t switch the fact blockchain can be used spil ",backend", or ",database", ter a way that it wasn’t possible before, if you don’t know or don’t believe te any of the projects than that’s your opinion but perhaps you should dig a bit deeper technically and figure out some of the points you still missing before doing such badly-informed affirmation.

I suspect he is aware of that but such things do not come into voeling with most people on a day to day ondergrond – and it is certainly not used spil such around where I live. On the other forearm, compare that to every man on the street deep rente te ‘buying bitcoin’ so ‘he can make some money’. Tulips had nothing on bitcoin.

Related movie: $2000 te Bitconnect Loans!

Leave a Reply