Quote from: BobK71 on April 20, 2017, 04:55:11 PM

Quote from: deisik on April 19, 2017, 01:08:52 PM

Quote from: lazyturtle on April 19, 2017, 01:05:39 PM

My personal theory is that cryptocurrency is not the bubble, but rather the needle that will burst the fiat money bubble. Trough history we have always had an easy way to attribute value to things without it. Those who believe that fiat money is the only true way often attribute their opinion to the fact that fiat money is substainsable because of its centralized nature and its history of being used as a represantation of value

Right now it is (for the most part, at least)

Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies fit well into the definition of a financial bubble. I could even claim that Bitcoin is a sort of tulipomania. Just like tulips, bitcoins are useful for some purpose, namely, for transferring value around the world while completely bypassing centralized (real controlled) entities like banks, but Bitcoin current price is by no means determined by this utility. Most of Bitcoin value today comes from sheer speculation. Whether Bitcoin bubble is going to pop eventually or its real use as a currency will finally match its use as a speculative vehicle is not clear as of yet

There's a major difference between tulips and Bitcoin. Tulips were not a very good money. Bitcoin is designed to be a money, with anonymity and security built into an electronic architecture, in addition to the usual monetary properties like durability, divisibility, etc

It should be pretty obvious by now that all these features don't suffice

For something to become money it should be used as money, i.e. to be accepted as a universal means of payment or account. Therefore, until Bitcoin starts being used as money (in any meaningful degree), it cannot be considered as money even if it has all the required qualities and prerequisites money should possess. So there is not a big difference between tulips and Bitcoin primarily because its monetary qualities have been mostly neglected so far