In the recent bifurcation of the Bitcoin network, many have been surprised that the new currency, Bitcoin Cash , not only has not completely lost its value, as many expected ( "free money, sell", they said), but remains alive and trading at negligible prices. Who sold the new currency at the beginning of your quote might be repenting bitterly, if they are not looking away.
What happened solves many issues, but also raises other news of interest to the market.
Bitcoin shows obvious signs of being immersed still in its infancy . Just look at the statistics about who makes up this market to understand. As with all new technologies, the distribution of their adoptive parents according to sex is a telltale sign. For reasons not relevant here, the new technologies are systematically taken by male persons, and extend to female as the technology matures, becoming more common. A glance at current statistics show that, as of today (08.26.17), the 96.57% of the people involved in Bitcoin are men, compared to 3.43% of women. This is a clear indication that Bitcoin is in its infancy.
But we are seeing a massive influx of new users in the market, attracted by the usefulness of the product, capital gains so far and encouraged by the "evangelists" of this technology are becoming more and more coins. We are witnessing a growing exponential whose roof is unclear.
At the same time we have witnessed a first fork, and a crucial question arises: what will elect new adopters chain? At this rate, the new majority adopters could be on the market shortly, so it is no trivial matter. Wherever you go these new adopters cause large price movements and changes in infrastructure . Those outside have already heard of Bitcoin, but few know that now there are two to choose from , and probably in November will be three. Adhesions outside the propagandists of different chains can achieve at the foot of the canyon, it is expected that the chain dominant takes the vast majority of new adopters. When a new user decides to buy bitcoins you will not want to consider matters he does not understand; You want to buy "genuine" although we know that such a thing does not exist.
What characterizes the Bitcoin market players is the greed for money good quality . "Quality Money" means "accepted by many money" and therefore "Known money , " so the key chain take advantage in this regard. But that is only one factor, because the quality of money is also determined by other features, no less important. If it were not so, I would not have come Bitcoin trading at prices that have, as there are very few people who accept it compared to any legal tender currency.
Ease of use, the quasi-anonymity and predictable inflation and declining Bitcoin, make it a safe haven practically perfect and so far, in that there is no difference between Bitcoin Core and Bitcoin Cash. It is also important friction when transfer value and the cost of each transaction, but this really has been a noticeable difference main -motif both fork August and the próxima- that casts shadows on the future of Bitcoin Core . Because in the end everything comes from Core's decision not to allow the block size increases, the simplest solution to the problem of scalability. In addition, the implementation of additional code that generates serious doubts for their appears on the horizon effects futures currency Bitcoin quality, which could eventually benefit only interests external to the market, to the detriment of the interests of the participants.
Contrary Core programmers seem to believe , the network is not his creation but users who use the Core programming services for the chain block remains accessible and usable. If your purpose is to add value, technicians must serve users, since the structure that gives value to the system is made up of people, not wires or algorithms . Markets are spontaneous orders formed by people, not sets of windows, shelves, network servers, or lines of code. The construction of these additions corresponds to technicians who do not have to understand what happens in the market or their reasons to exist.
The work of programmers is programmed well , which is not little; in office decide not fit the economic characteristics of the system. They have to know much about programming, but do not have to understand economics, so they should not make decisions intended to modify the behavior of economic agents. Think that is reasonable, even possible to plan economic actions of others, it is fatal arrogance in its purest form . If such a thing happens, people do not hesitate to leave their money elsewhere, and the market would vanish as it emerged. Because the "strong hands" of this market are not the Core, but those who expose their money on it every day.
So great is the obfuscation among programmers criptomonedas, which is common to hear Satoshi Nakamoto criticism for its limited programming skills, which should blush of embarrassment to anyone who understands the significance of the Bitcoin project. It is much like criticizing Antonio Gaudà for his inability to overturn walls, against the plans of the Sagrada Familia .
Nakamoto's work was never to program well, and he knew perfectly. What Nakamoto did was launch a bright id ae, no computer economic. The code was not the constituent of that idea, but an indispensable instrument to implement it . So once I had the opportunity, he used people who could schedule better than himself. Nakamoto was the architect, while programmers are the masons who have to operate according to project the idea of its creator . Because if they build something else, not the Nakamoto Bitcoin. And if you do not correctly interpret the economic implications of their actions, the market will be ruthless with them.
0 Comments