Very reasonable!

You're very right about Bitcoin being in its speculative stage right now. The coming years will be decisive for it. Notable questions include: how will the regulation conversation progress? Can mining become more energy sensitive? Can consumers' funds be stored more securely? We are still in the process of reaching definitive answers.

Based on the latter portion of your comment, I thought I would clarify the following. Even though there will only ever be 21 million Bitcoins minted, Bitcoin can be owned in fractional shares up to 8 decimal points, allowing for its ecosystem to accommodate for much wider adoption. In fact, the majority of Bitcoin-owners own far less than one Bitcoin. This was clearly understood from the outset and was considered carefully in the code.

It's a good question!

It all goes according to the nuance of definitions. I believe that technically speaking, a digital currency must be bereft of any physical equivalent. So, the the figure of U.S. dollars you see digitally in your banking app, or PayPal account as you said, would not constitute a "digital currency." Rather, this would be referred to as ""Digital money."":www.investopedia.com/terms/d/digital-money.asp From what I understand, an example of a truly digital, non-cryptographic currency would be "Ven":https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven_(currency), which has centralized oversight and lacks a physical underpinning.

This article reads much better as an endorsement for DLT and blockchain than it does for Bitcoin. The author's statement "you cannot use a bitcoin blockchain without a bitcoin" is true, but actually seems like a tangent from the primary substance of the article (which, for the record, is very well written). Bitcoin is what brought the DLT and blockchain to the forefront, but now that we have exposed the underlying technologies and learned how to use them independently from Bitcoin, Bitcoin's current value doesn't appear to stem from the technology that it's running on.

Thanks for the mention @[David P. Goldsmith](user:22566). There are MANY issues with Bitcoin, but being a Ponzi scheme is simply not one of them. Look up the definition of Ponzi scheme and try to factually articulate that Bitcoin is one.

Also, comparing BTC and XRP in such a manner is not particularly effective as they have different goals. As a side note, BTC is a completely decentralized ecosystem and XRP is quite centralized at the top.

Great questions.

Bitcoin was the first ever cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrencies use cryptography to facilitate and secure transactions, and use blockchain networks to operate in a decentralized fashion.

A cryptocurrency is a type of digital currency, yet not all digital currencies are cryptocurrencies. Think of digital currencies simply as "electronic money" that lacks physical form, but don't necessarily bear that qualities listed above.

At the time of this post, leading cryptocurrency data site coinmarketcap.com maintains that there are just under 1550 cryptocurrencies currently out there. This figure varies slightly by the day, but has been trending up over the past few years.

Great article. Thanks!

I agree that the referenced article is one-sided and perhaps slightly biased in certain respects.

That being said, I linked the article for the sole purpose of debunking the notion that Bitcoin is a Ponzi scheme, which I firmly believe, and which the article does a really nice job articulating. The author raises very legitimate points, uses fact-driven analysis and breaks down definitions to prove his point. He even highlights the logical backing of the other position on the issue, which is responsible and admirable.

While we certainly don’t know everything about Bitcoin, we certainly know a lot. Besides the anonymous creator aspect, which is causing all of these Bitcoin forks, is there another issue you find noteworthy in this regard?

Thanks, Azi!

Thanks for sharing this. Bitcoin has shred more than half its value countless times since its inception, only to reach all time highs at some point in the future.

1. Do you think this trend will continue and we’ll see it break 20k?

2. Logic says that such extreme volotility has to ease up at some point. Any technical analysis on how we could forecast when?